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 · 2008-01-28 · DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE · Notices

Notices. Proposed collection; comments requested

74,885 words·~340 min read·/register/2008/01/28/08-333

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

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Rural Housing Service Rural Business-Cooperative Service Notice of Request for Revision of a Currently Approved Information Collection AGENCIES: Rural Housing Service and Rural Business-Cooperative Service, USDA. ACTION: Proposed collection; comments requested. SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice announces the intention of the above-named Agencies to request an extension for the currently approved information collection in support of the servicing of Community and Direct Business Programs Loans and Grants.
DATES: Comments on this notice must be received by March 28, 2008 to be assured of consideration. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Beth Jones, Senior Loan Specialist, Community Programs Direct Loans and Grants Processing and Servicing, RHS, USDA, 1400 Independence Ave., SW., STOP 0787, Washington, DC 20250-0787, Telephone
(202)720-1498, E-mail: *beth.jones@wdc.usda.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Title:* 7 CFR 1951-E, Servicing of Community and Direct Business Programs Loans and Grants. *OMB Number:* 0575-0066. *Expiration Date of Approval:* June 30, 2008. *Type of Request:* Extension of a currently approved information collection. *Abstract:* The Community Facilities program is authorized to make loans and grants to public entities, nonprofit corporations, and Indian tribes for the development of essential community facilities primarily serving rural residents. The Direct Business and Industry program, under Rural Business-Cooperative Service, is authorized to make loans to improve, develop, or finance business, industry, and employment, and improve the economic and environmental climate in rural communities. The purpose of this collection is to establish security servicing policies, assist recipients in meeting the objectives of the loans and grants, repay loans on schedule, comply with agreements, and protect the Government's financial interest. Routine servicing responsibilities include collection of payments, compliance reviews, security inspections, review of financial reports, determining applicant/borrower eligibility and project feasibility for various servicing actions, monitoring delinquent accounts, and supervision activities. Supervision by the Agencies include, but is not limited to: review of budgets, management reports, audits and financial statements; performing security inspections; providing, arranging, or recommending technical assistance; evaluating environmental impacts of proposed actions by the borrower; performing civil rights compliance reviews; and assisting in the development of workout agreements. Information will be collected by the field offices from applicants, borrowers, consultants, lenders, and attorneys. Failure to collect information could result in improper servicing of these loans. *Estimate of Burden:* Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response. *Respondents:* State, local or tribal Governments, Not-for-profit institutions, businesses, and individuals. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 587. *Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent:* 2. *Estimated Number of Responses:* 1,094. *Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents:* 1,042. Copies of the information collection can be obtained from Cheryl Thompson, Regulations and Paperwork Management Branch, at
(202)692-0043. *Comments:* Comments are invited on:
(a)Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agencies, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(b)the accuracy of the Agencies' estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
(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 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. Comments may be sent to Cheryl Thompson, Regulations and Paperwork Management Branch, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Rural Development, 7th Floor, Room 701, 300 7th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20024. All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will also become a matter of public record. Dated: January 18, 2008. Russell T. Davis, Administrator, Rural Housing Service. Ben Anderson, Administrator, Rural Business-Cooperative Service. [FR Doc. E8-1354 Filed 1-25-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-XV-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Rural Utilities Service Announcement of Grant Application Deadlines and Funding Levels for the Assistance to High Energy Cost Rural Communities AGENCY: Rural Utilities Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice of funding availability (NOFA). SUMMARY: The Rural Utilities Service, an agency delivering the United States Department of Agriculture's
(USDA)Rural Development Utilities Programs, hereinafter referred to as Rural Development and/or the Agency, announces the availability of $6.8 million in Fiscal Year 2008 for competitive grants to assist communities with extremely high energy costs. This grant program is authorized under section 19 of the Rural Electrification Act of 1936 (RE Act) (7 U.S.C. 918a) and program regulations at 7 CFR part 1709. The grant funds may be used to acquire, construct, extend, upgrade, or otherwise improve energy generation, transmission, or distribution facilities serving communities in which the average residential expenditure for home energy exceeds 275 percent of the national average. Eligible applicants include persons, States, political subdivisions of States, and other entities organized under State law. Federally-recognized Indian tribes and tribal entities are eligible applicants. This notice describes the eligibility and application requirements, the criteria that will be used by the Agency to award funding, and information on how to obtain application materials. All grants awarded under this NOFA are contingent on the availability of appropriated funds. The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
(CFDA)Number for this program is 10.859. You may obtain the application guide and materials for the Assistance to High Energy Cost Rural Communities Grant Program via the Internet at the following Web site: *http://www.usda.gov/rus/electric/* . You may also request the application guide and materials from USDA Rural Development by contacting the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this notice. DATES: You may submit completed grant applications on paper or electronically according to the following deadlines: • Paper applications must be postmarked and mailed, shipped, or sent overnight, *no later* than March 28, 2008 or hand delivered to the Agency by this deadline, to be eligible for under this NOFA. Late or incomplete applications will not be eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. • Electronic applications must be submitted through *Grants.gov no later* than March 28, 2008 to be eligible under this NOFA for FY 2008 grant funding. Late or incomplete electronic applications will not be eligible. • Applications will be accepted on publication of this notice. ADDRESSES: You may submit completed applications for grants on paper or electronically to the following addresses: • Paper applications are to be submitted to the United States Department of Agriculture, Rural Development Electric Program, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., STOP 1560, Room 5165 South Building, Washington, DC 20250-1560. Applications should be marked “Attention: High Energy Cost Community Grant Program.” • Applications may be submitted electronically through *Grants.gov.* Information on how to submit applications electronically is available on the *Grants.gov* Web site ( *http://www.Grants.gov* ). Applicants must successfully pre-register with *Grants.gov* to use the electronic applications option. Application information may be downloaded from *Grants.gov* without pre-registration. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen Larsen, Management Analyst, United States Department of Agriculture, Rural Development Electric Program, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., STOP 1560, Room 5165 South Building, Washington, DC 20250-1560. Telephone 202-720-9545, Fax 202-690-0717, e-mail *energy.grants@wdc.usda.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Overview Information *Federal Agency Name:* United States Department of Agriculture, Rural Development Utilities Programs, Assistant Administrator, Electric Programs. *Funding Opportunity Title:* Assistance to High Energy Cost Rural Communities. *Announcement Type:* Initial announcement. *Funding Opportunity Number:* USDA-RD-RUS-HECG07. *Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
(CFDA)Number:* 10.859. The CFDA title for this program is “Assistance to High Energy Cost Rural Communities.” *Dates:* Applications must be postmarked and mailed or shipped, or hand delivered to the Agency, or filed with *Grants.gov* by March 28, 2008. I. Funding Opportunity Description Rural Development is making available $6.8 million in competitive grants under section 19 of the Rural Electrification Act of 1936 (the “RE Act”) (7 U.S.C. 918a). Under section 19, the Agency Administrator is authorized to make grants to “acquire, construct, extend, upgrade, and otherwise improve energy generation, transmission, or distribution facilities” serving extremely high energy cost communities. Eligible communities are those in which the average residential expenditure for home energy is at least 275 percent of the national average residential expenditure for home energy under one or more of the benchmarks published in this notice. Program regulations are codified at 7 CFR part 1709. The purpose of this grant program is provide financial assistance for a broad range of energy facilities, equipment and related activities to offset the impacts of extremely high residential energy costs on eligible communities. Grant funds may be used to purchase, construct, extend, repair, upgrade and otherwise improve energy generation, transmission, or distribution facilities serving eligible communities. Eligible facilities include on-grid and off-grid renewable energy systems and implementation of cost-effective demand side management and energy conservation programs that benefit eligible communities. Grant funds may not be used to pay utility bills or to purchase fuel. Grant projects under this program must provide community benefits and not be for the sole benefit of an individual applicant, household, or business. Eligible applicants include for-profit and non-profit businesses, cooperatives, and associations, States, political subdivisions of States, and other entities organized under the laws of States, Indian tribes, tribal entities, and individuals. Eligible applicants also include entities located in U.S. Territories and other areas authorized by law to participate in the Agency's programs or programs under the RE Act. No cost sharing or matching funds are required as a condition of eligibility under this grant program. However, the Agency will consider other financial resources available to the applicant and any voluntary commitment of matching funds or other contributions in assessing the applicant's capacity to carry out the grant program successfully. The Agency will award additional evaluation points to any proposals that include such contributions. As a further condition of each grant, section 19(b)(2) of the RE Act requires that planning and administrative expenses of the grantee not directly related to the project may not exceed 4 percent of the grant funds. This NOFA provides an overview of the grant program, and the eligibility and application requirements, and selection criteria for grant proposals. The Agency is also making available an Application Guide with more detailed information on application requirements and copies of all required forms and certifications. The Application Guide is available on the Internet from the Agency Web site at *http://www.usda.gov/rus/electric* . The application guide may also be requested from the Rural Development contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this notice. For additional information, applicants should consult the program regulations at 7 CFR part 1709. Definitions Consult the program regulations at 7 CFR part 1709 and the Application Guide for additional definitions used in this program. As used in this NOFA: *Application Guide* means the Application Guide prepared by the Agency for the High Energy Cost Grant program containing detailed instructions for determining eligibility and preparing grant applications, and copies of required forms, questionnaires, and model certifications. *Extremely high energy costs* means community average residential energy costs that meet or exceed one or more home energy cost benchmarks established by the Agency at 275 percent of the national average residential energy expenditures as reported by the Energy Information Administration
(EIA)of the United States Department of Energy. *Home energy* means any energy source or fuel used by a household for purposes other than transportation, including electricity, natural gas, fuel oil, kerosene, liquefied petroleum gas (propane), other petroleum products, wood and other biomass fuels, coal, wind, and solar energy. Fuels used for subsistence activities in remote rural areas are also included. *High energy cost benchmarks* means the criteria established by the Agency for eligibility as an extremely high energy cost community. Home energy cost benchmarks are calculated for total annual household energy expenditures; total annual expenditures for individual fuels; annual average per unit energy costs for primary home energy sources and are set at 275 percent of the relevant national average household energy expenditures. *Indian Tribe* means a Federally recognized tribe as defined under section 4 of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b) to include “* * * any Indian tribe, band, nation, or other organized group or community, including any Alaska Native village or regional or village corporation as defined in or established pursuant to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act [43 U.S.C. 1601 *et seq.* ], that is recognized as eligible for the special programs and services provided by the United States to Indians because of their status as Indians.” *Person* means any natural person, firm, corporation, association, or other legal entity, and includes Indian Tribes and tribal entities. *Primary home energy source* means the energy source that is used for space heating or cooling, water heating, cooking, and lighting. A household or community may have more than one primary home energy source. *State rural development initiative* means a rural economic development program funded by or carried out in cooperation with a State agency. *Target area* means the geographic area to be served by the grant. *Target community* means the unit or units of local government in which the target area is located. *Tribal entity* means a legal entity that is owned, controlled, sanctioned, or chartered by the recognized governing body of an Indian Tribe. II. Award Information The total amount of funds available for grants in Fiscal Year 2008 under this notice is $ _ million. The maximum amount of grant assistance that will be considered for funding in a grant application under this notice is $5,000,000. The minimum amount of assistance for a grant application under this program is $75,000. The number of grants awarded under this NOFA will depend on the number of applications submitted, the amount of grant funds requested, the quality and competitiveness of applications submitted, and the availability of appropriated funds. The funding instrument available under this NOFA will be a grant agreement. Grants awarded under this notice must comply with all applicable USDA and Federal regulations concerning financial assistance, with the terms of this notice, and with the requirements of section 19 of the RE Act. Grants made under this NOFA will be administered under the Agency program regulations at 7 CFR part 1709 and USDA financial assistance regulations at 7 CFR parts 3015, 3016, 3017, 3018, 3019, and 3052, as applicable. The award period will generally be for 36 months, however, longer periods may be approved depending on the project involved. Project proposals submitted in response to the NOFA published on August 17, 2007 (72 FR 46195) and that were accepted as complete and timely by the Agency, but that were not selected for funding may request reconsideration of their proposals under this NOFA. Prior applicants may submit additional information for consideration as described later in this notice. All timely submitted and complete applications will be reviewed for eligibility and rated according to the criteria described in this NOFA. Applications will be ranked in order of their numerical scores on the rating criteria and forwarded to the Agency Administrator. The Administrator will review the rankings and the recommendations of the rating panel. The Administrator will then fund grant applications in rank order. The Agency reserves the right not to award any or all the funds made available under this notice, if in the sole opinion of the Administrator, the grant proposals submitted are not deemed feasible. The Agency also reserves the right to partially fund grants if grant applications exceed the available funds. The Agency will advise applicants if it cannot fully fund a grant request. III. Eligibility Information 1. Eligible Applicants Under Section 19 eligible applicants include “Persons, States, political subdivisions of States, and other entities organized under the laws of States” (7 U.S.C. 918a). Under section 13 of the RE Act, the term “Person” means “any natural person, firm, corporation, or association” (7 U.S.C. 913). Examples of eligible business applicants include: For-profit and non-profit business entities, including but not limited to corporations, associations, partnerships, limited liability partnerships (LLPs), cooperatives, trusts, and sole proprietorships. Eligible government applicants include State and local governments, counties, cities, towns, boroughs, or other agencies or units of State or local governments; and other agencies and instrumentalities of States and local governments. Indian tribes, other tribal entities and Alaska Native Corporations are also eligible applicants. An individual is an eligible applicant under this program; however, the proposed grant project must provide community benefits and not be for the sole benefit of an individual applicant or an individual household or business. All applicants must demonstrate the legal capacity to enter into a binding grant agreement with the Federal Government at the time of the award and to carry out the proposed grant funded project according to its terms. Effective October 1, 2003, the Office of Management and Budget requires that all applicants for Federal grants with the exception of individuals other than sole proprietorships must have a Dun and Bradstreet (D&B) Data Universal Numbering System
(DUNS)number. Consistent with this Federal policy directive, any organization or sole proprietorship that applies for a high energy cost grant must use its DUNS number on the application and in the field provided on the revised Standard Form 424 (SF 424), “Application for Federal Assistance” to be eligible to apply. DUNS numbers are available without charge to Federal Grant applicants. Information on this Federal requirement and how to obtain a DUNS number or how to verify if your organization already has a DUNS number is available at *http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants/duns_num_guide.pdf* and on the “Get Registered” page at *Grants.gov* . D&B has also established a special Web-based registration for Federal Grant Applicants and Contractors that can be accessed directly by following the “Customer Resources” links for obtaining a DUNS number at *http://www.dnb.com/us/* . You may also verify whether you have an organizational DUNS number or request a DUNS number over the telephone toll free through the D&B Government Customer Response Center at 1-866-705-5711, Monday-Friday 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. C.S.T. If you already have obtained a DUNS number in connection with the Federal acquisition process or requested or had one assigned to you for another purpose, you should use that number on all of your applications. It is not necessary to request another DUNS number from D&B. 2. Cost Sharing and Matching No cost sharing or matching funds are required as a condition of eligibility under this grant program. However, the Agency will consider other financial resources available to the grant applicant and any voluntary pledge of matching funds or other contributions in assessing the applicant's commitment capacity to carry out the grant program successfully and will award additional evaluation points to proposals that include such contributions. If a successful applicant proposes to use matching funds or other cost contributions in its project to obtain additional evaluation points, the grant agreement will include conditions requiring documentation of the availability of the matching funds and actual expenditure of matching funds or cost contributions. 3. Other Eligibility Requirements A. Eligible Projects Grantees must use grant funds for eligible grant purposes. Grant funds may be used to acquire, construct, extend, upgrade, or otherwise improve energy generation, transmission, or distribution facilities serving eligible communities. All energy generation, transmission, and distribution facilities and equipment, used to provide electricity, natural gas, home heating fuels, and other energy service to eligible communities are eligible. Projects providing or improving energy services to eligible communities through on-grid and off-grid renewable energy projects, energy efficiency, and energy conservation projects are eligible. A grant project is eligible if it improves, or maintains energy services, or reduces the costs of providing energy services to eligible communities. Grant funds may not be used to pay utility bills or to purchase fuels. Grants may cover up to the full costs of any eligible projects subject to the statutory condition that no more than 4 percent of grant funds may be used for the planning and administrative expenses of the grantee. The program regulations at 7 CFR part 1709 provide more detail on allowable uses of grant funds, limitations on grant funds, and ineligible grant purposes. The project must serve communities that meet the extremely high energy cost eligibility requirements described in this NOFA. The applicant must demonstrate that the proposed project will benefit the eligible communities. Projects that primarily benefit a single household or business are not eligible. Additional information and examples of eligible project activities are contained in the Application Guide. Grant funds cannot be used for: preparation of the grant application, fuel purchases, routine maintenance or other operating costs, and purchase of equipment, structures, or real estate not directly associated with provision of residential energy services. In general, grant funds may not be used to support projects that primarily benefit areas outside of eligible target communities. However, grant funds may be used to finance an eligible target community's proportionate share of a larger energy project. Each grant applicant must demonstrate the economic and technical feasibility of its proposed project. Activities or equipment that would commonly be considered as research and development activities, or commercial demonstration projects for new energy technologies will not be considered as technologically feasible projects and would, thus, be ineligible grant purposes. However, grant funds may be used for projects that involve the innovative use or adaptation of energy-related technologies that have been commercially proven. B. Eligible Communities The grant project must benefit communities with extremely high energy costs. The RE Act defines an extremely high energy cost community as one in which “the average residential expenditure for home energy is at least 275 percent of the national average residential expenditure for home energy” 7 U.S.C. 918a. The benchmarks are set based on the latest available information from the Energy Information Administration
(EIA)residential energy surveys. The statutory requirement that community residential expenditures for home energy exceed 275 percent of national average establishes a very high threshold for eligibility under this program. The Agency has calculated high energy cost benchmarks based on the most recent EIA national average home energy expenditure data. The current benchmarks are shown in Table 1. Communities must meet one or more high energy cost benchmarks to qualify as an eligible beneficiary of a grant under this program. All applicants, including those requesting reconsideration of prior applications must meet these current eligibility benchmarks. Based on available published information on residential energy costs, the Agency anticipates that only those communities with the highest energy costs across the country will qualify under this congressionally-mandated standard. The EIA's Residential Energy Consumption and Expenditure Surveys
(RECS)and reports provide the baseline national average household energy costs that were used by the Agency for establishing extremely high energy cost community eligibility criteria for this grant program. The RECS data base and reports provide national and regional information on residential energy use, expenditures, and housing characteristics. EIA published its latest available RECS home energy expenditure survey results in 2004. These estimates of home energy usage and expenditures are based on national surveys conducted in *2001* survey data and are shown in Table 1 as follows: Table 1.—National Average Annual Household Energy Expenditures and Extremely High Energy Cost Eligibility Benchmarks [Effective March 23, 2005] National annual average household expenditure $ per year Extremely high energy cost benchmark 275% of national average $ per year AVERAGE ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD EXPENDITURE Fuel: Electricity 938 2,509 Natural Gas 702 1,859 Fuel Oil 737 1,882 LPG/Propane 605 1,514 Total Household Energy Use 1,493 4,013 ANNUAL AVERAGE PER UNIT RESIDENTIAL ENERGY COSTS National average unit cost $ per unit Extremely high-energy cost benchmark 275% of national average $ per unit Fuel (units): Electricity (kilowatt hours) 0.088 0.239 Natural Gas (thousand cubic feet) 9.98 26.85 Fuel Oil (gallons) 1.24 3.35 LPG/Propane (gallons) 1.36 3.61 Total Household Energy (million Btus) 16.19 43.91 *Sources:* United States Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, *Residential Energy Consumption and Expenditure Surveys 2001,* available online at *http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/recs/contents.html.* The eligibility benchmarks are set at 275 percent of the national average and include adjustments to reflect the uncertainties inherent in EIA's statistical methodology for estimating home energy costs. The benchmarks are set based on the EIA's lower range estimates using the specified EIA methods. Extremely high energy costs in rural and remote communities typically result from a combination of factors including high energy consumption, high per unit energy costs, limited availability of energy sources, extreme climate conditions, and housing characteristics. The relative impacts of these conditions exhibit regional and seasonal diversity. Market factors have created an additional complication in recent years as the prices of the major commercial residential energy sources—electricity, fuel oil, natural gas, and LPG/propane—have fluctuated dramatically in some areas. The applicant must demonstrate that each community in the grant project's proposed target area exceeds one or more of these high energy cost benchmarks to be eligible for assistance under this program. i. High Energy Cost Benchmarks The benchmarks measure extremely high energy costs for residential consumers. These benchmarks were calculated using EIA's estimates of national average residential energy expenditures per household and by primary home energy source. The benchmarks recognize the diverse factors that contribute to extremely high home energy costs in rural communities. The benchmarks allow extremely high energy cost communities several alternatives for demonstrating eligibility. Communities may qualify based on: total annual household energy expenditures; total annual expenditures for commercially-supplied primary home energy sources, i.e., electricity, natural gas, oil, or propane; or average annual per unit home energy costs. By providing alternative measures for demonstrating eligibility, the benchmarks reduce the burden on potential applicants created by the limited public availability of comprehensive data on local community energy consumption and expenditures. A target community or target area will qualify as an extremely high cost energy community if it meets one or more of the energy cost eligibility benchmarks described below. 1. * Extremely High Average Annual Household Expenditure for Home Energy. * The target area or community exceeds one or more of the following: • Average annual residential electricity expenditure of $2,509 per household; • Average annual residential natural gas expenditure of $1,859 per household; • Average annual residential expenditure on fuel oil of $1,882 per household; • Average annual residential expenditure on propane or liquefied petroleum gas
(LPG)as a primary home energy source of $1,514 per household; or • Average annual residential energy expenditure (for all non-transportation uses) of $4,013 per household. 2. *Extremely High Average Per Unit Energy Costs.* The average residential per unit cost for major commercial energy sources in the target area or community exceeds one or more of the following: • Annual average revenues per kilowatt hour for residential electricity customers of $0.239 per kilowatt hour (kWh); • Annual average residential natural gas price of $26.85 per thousand cubic feet; • Annual average residential fuel oil price of $3.35 per gallon; • Annual average residential price of propane or LPG as a primary home energy source of $3.61 per gallon; or • Total annual average residential energy cost on a Btu basis of $43.91 per million Btu. 1 1 Note: Btu is the abbreviation for British Thermal Unit, a standard energy measure. A Btu is the quantity of heat needed to raise the temperature of one pound of water 1 degree Fahreneit at or near 39.2 degrees Fahrenheit. In estimating average household per unit energy cost on a Btu basis, the costs of different home energy sources are converted to a standard Btu basis. The Application Guide contains additional information on calculating per unit costs on a Btu basis for major home energy sources. ii. Supporting Energy Cost Data The applicant must include information that demonstrates its eligibility under the Agency's high energy cost benchmarks for the target communities and the target areas. The applicant must supply documentation or references for its sources for actual or estimated home energy expenditures or equivalent measures to support eligibility. Generally, the applicant will be expected to use historical residential energy cost or expenditure information for the local energy provider serving the target community or target area to determine eligibility. Other potential sources of home energy related information include Federal and State agencies, local community energy providers such as electric and natural gas utilities and fuel dealers, and commercial publications. The Application Guide includes a list of EIA resources on residential energy consumption and costs that may be of assistance. The grant applicant must establish eligibility for each community in the project's target area. To determine eligibility, the applicant must identify each community included in whole or in part within the target areas and provide supporting actual or estimated energy expenditure data for each community. The smallest area that may be designated as a target area is a 2000 Census block. This minimum size is necessary to enable a determination of population size. Potential applicants can compare the benchmark criteria to available information about local energy use and costs to determine their eligibility. Applicants should demonstrate their eligibility using historical energy use and cost information. Where such information is unavailable or does not adequately reflect the actual costs of supporting average home energy use in a local community, the Agency will consider estimated commercial energy costs. The Application Guide includes examples of circumstances where estimated energy costs are used. EIA does not collect or maintain data on home energy expenditures in sufficient detail to identify specific rural localities as extremely high energy cost communities. Therefore, grant applicants will have to provide information on local community energy costs from other sources to support their applications. In many instances, historical community energy cost information can be obtained from a variety of public sources or from local utilities and other energy providers. For example, EIA publishes monthly and annual reports of residential prices by State and by service area for electric utilities and larger natural gas distribution companies. Average residential fuel oil and propane prices are reported regionally and for major cities by government and private publications. Many State agencies also compile and publish information on residential energy costs to support State programs. iii. Use of Estimated Home Energy Costs Where historical community energy cost data are incomplete or lacking or where community-wide data do not accurately reflect the costs of providing home energy services in the target area, the applicant may substitute estimates based on engineering standards. The estimates should use available community, local, or regional data on energy expenditures, consumption, housing characteristics and population. Estimates are also appropriate where the target area does not presently have centralized commercial energy services at a level that is comparable to other residential customers in the State or region. For example, local commercial energy cost information may not be available where the target area is without local electric service because of the high costs of connection. Engineering cost estimates reflecting the incremental costs of extending service could reasonably be used to establish eligibility for areas without grid-connected electric service. Estimates also may be appropriate where historical energy costs do not reflect the costs of providing a necessary upgrade or replacement of energy infrastructure to maintain or extend service that would raise costs above one or more of benchmarks. Information to support high energy cost eligibility is subject to independent review by the Agency. Applications that contain information that is not reasonably based on credible sources of information and sound estimates will be rejected. Where appropriate, the Agency may consult standard sources to confirm the reasonableness of information and estimates provided by applicants in determining eligibility, technical feasibility, and adequacy of proposed budget estimates. C. Coordination With State Rural Development Initiatives USDA encourages the coordination of grant projects under this program with State rural development initiatives. There is no requirement that the grant proposal receive the concurrence or approval of State officials as a condition of eligibility under this program. The Agency will, however, award additional points to proposals that are coordinated with and support rural development initiatives within a State. The applicant should describe how the proposed project will support State rural development initiatives and provide documentation evidencing any project relationship to State initiatives. If an applicant is an entity directly involved in rural development efforts, such as a State, local, or tribal rural development agency, the applicant may qualify for additional points by describing how its proposed project supports its efforts. D. Limitations on Grant Awards 1. Statutory limitation on planning and administrative expenses. Section 19 of the RE Act provides that no more than 4 percent of the grant funds for any project may be used for the planning and administrative expenses of the grantee that are not directly related to the grant project. 2. Ineligible Grant Purposes. Grant funds cannot be used for: preparation of the grant application, fuel purchases, routine maintenance or other operating costs, and purchase of equipment, structures, or real estate not directly associated with provision of residential energy services. In general, grant funds may not be used to support projects that primarily benefit areas outside of eligible target communities. However, grant funds may be used to finance an eligible target community's proportionate share of a larger energy project. Consistent with USDA policy and program regulations, grant funds awarded under this program generally cannot be used to replace other USDA assistance or to refinance or repay outstanding loans under the RE Act. Grant funds may, however, be used in combination with other USDA assistance programs including electric loans. Grants may be applied toward grantee contributions under other USDA programs depending on the terms of those programs. For example, an applicant may propose to use grant funds to offset the costs of electric system improvements in extremely high cost areas by increasing the utility's contribution for line extensions or system expansions to its distribution system financed in whole or part by an electric loan under the RE Act. An applicant may propose to finance a portion of an energy project for an extremely high energy cost community through this grant program and secure the remaining project costs through a loan or loan guarantee or grant from the Agency or other sources. 3. Maximum and minimum awards. The maximum amount of grant assistance that will be considered for funding per grant application under this notice is $5,000,000. The minimum amount of assistance for a competitive grant application under this program is $75,000. IV. Application and Submission Information All applications must be prepared and submitted in compliance with this NOFA and the Application Guide. The Application Guide contains additional information on the grant program, sources of information for use in preparing applications, examples of eligible projects, and copies of the required application forms. 1. Address to Request an Application Package Applications materials and the Application Guide are available for download through *http://www.Grants.gov* (under CFDA No. 10.859) and on the Electric Programs Web site at *http://www.usda.gov/rus/electric.* Application packages, including required forms, may be also be requested from: Karen Larsen, Management Analyst, United States Department of Agriculture, Rural Development Utilities Programs, Electric Program, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., STOP 1560, Room 5165 South Building, Washington, DC 20250-1560. Telephone 202-720-9545, Fax 202-690-0717, e-mail *energy.grants@wdc.usda.gov.* 2. Content and Form of Application Submission There are different application requirements for first time applicants and for prior applicants requesting reconsideration. First time applicants are those that did not submit a timely application in response to the August 17, 2007 (72 FR 46195) NOFA. Prior applicants are those that:
(1)Submitted timely and complete applications under the August 17, 2007 NOFA;
(2)were not selected for a grant award; and
(3)would like to request consideration of their proposal under this notice. First time applicants should follow the directions in this notice and the Application Guide in preparing their applications and narrative proposals. The completed application package should be assembled in the order specified with all pages numbered sequentially or by section. If you submitted an application in 2003, 2004, or 2005 but did not submit a request for reconsideration in 2007, you must submit a complete new application package meeting current eligibility and content requirements. Prior applicants should follow the special instructions for reconsideration and submit a revised Standard Form 424 (SF-424), a letter requesting reconsideration, and any supplemental material by the deadline. A. Application Contents for First Time Applicants First time applicants must submit the following information for the application to be complete and considered for funding: *Part A. A Completed SF 424, “Application for Federal Assistance.”* This form must be signed by a person authorized to submit the proposal on behalf of the applicant. Note: SF 424 has recently been revised to include new required data elements, including a DUNS number. You must submit the revised form. Copies of this form are available in the application package available on line through the Agency website or through Grants.gov, or by request from the Agency contact listed above. *Part B. Grant Proposal.* The grant proposal is a narrative description prepared by the applicant that establishes the applicant's eligibility, identifies the eligible extremely high energy cost communities to be served by the grant, and describes the proposed grant project, the potential benefits of the project, and a proposed budget. The grant proposal should contain the following sections in the order indicated. *1. Executive Summary.* The Executive Summary is a one to two page narrative summary that:
(a)Identifies the applicant, project title, and the key contact person with telephone and fax numbers, mailing address and email address;
(b)specifies the amount of grant funds requested;
(c)provides a brief description of the proposed project including the eligible rural communities and residents to be served, activities and facilities to be financed, and how the grant project will offset or reduce the target community's extremely high energy costs; and
(d)identifies the associated state rural development initiative, if any, that the project supports. The Executive Summary should also indicate whether the applicant is claiming additional points under any of the criteria designated as USDA priorities under this NOFA. *2. Table of Contents.* The application package must include a table of contents immediately after the Executive Summary with page numbers for all required sections, forms, and appendices. *3. Applicant Eligibility.* This section includes a narrative statement that identifies the applicant and supporting evidence establishing that the applicant has or will have the legal authority to enter into a financial assistance relationship with the Federal Government. Examples of supporting evidence of applicant's legal existence and eligibility include: a reference to or copy of the relevant statute, regulation, executive order, or legal opinion authorizing a State, local, or tribal government program, articles of incorporation or certificates of incorporation for corporate applicants, partnership or trust agreements, board resolutions. Applicants must also be free of any debarment or other restriction on their ability to contract with the Federal Government. *4. Community Eligibility.* This section provides a narrative description of the community or communities to be served by the grant and supporting information to establish eligibility. The narrative must show that the proposed grant project's target area or areas are located in one or more communities where the average residential energy costs exceed one or more of the benchmark criteria for extremely high energy costs as described in this NOFA. The narrative should clearly identify the location and population of the areas to be aided by the grant project and their energy costs and the population of the local government division in which they are located. Local energy providers and sources of high energy cost data and estimates should be clearly identified. Neither the applicant nor the project must be physically located in the extremely high energy cost community, but the funded project must serve an eligible community. The population estimates should be based on the results of the 2000 Census available from the U.S. Census Bureau. Additional information and exhibits supporting eligibility may include maps, summary tables, and references to statistical information from the U.S. Census, the Energy Information Administration, other Federal and State agencies, or private sources. The Application Guide includes additional information and sources that the applicant may find useful in establishing community eligibility. *5. Coordination with State Rural Development Initiatives.* In this section the applicant must describe how the proposed grant is coordinated with and supports any rural development efforts. The applicant should provide supporting references or documentation of any relationship or contribution to State rural development initiatives. *6. Project Overview.* This section includes the applicant's narrative overview of its proposed project. The narrative must address the following: *a. Project Design:* This section must provide a narrative description of the project including a proposed scope of work identifying major tasks and proposed schedules for task completion, a detailed description of the equipment, facilities and associated activities to be financed with grant funds, the location of the eligible extremely high energy cost communities to be served, and an estimate of the overall duration of the project. The Project Design description should be sufficiently detailed to support a finding of technical feasibility. Proposed projects involving construction, repair, replacement, or improvement of electric generation, transmission, and distribution facilities must generally be consistent with the standards and requirements for projects financed with loans and loan guarantees under the RE Act as set forth in the Agency's Electric Programs Regulations and Bulletins and may reference these requirements. *b. Project Management:* This section must provide a narrative describing the applicant's capabilities and project management plans. The description should address the applicant's organizational structure, method of funding, legal authority, key personnel, project management experience, financial management systems, staff resources, the goals and objectives of the program or business, and any related services provided to the project beneficiaries. A current financial statement and other supporting documentation may be referenced here and included under the Supplementary Material section. If the applicant proposes to use affiliated entities, contractors, or subcontractors to provide services funded under the grant, the applicant must describe the identities, relationship, qualifications, and experience of these affiliated entities. The experience and capabilities of these entities will be reviewed by the rating panel. If the applicant proposes to secure equipment, design, construction, or other services from non-affiliated entities, the applicant must briefly describe how it plans to procure and/or contract for such equipment or services. The applicant should provide information that will support a finding that the combination of management team's experience, financial management capabilities, resources and project structure will enable successful completion of the project. Applicants are encouraged to review the financial management requirements for Federal grantees in 7 CFR part 1709 and USDA financial assistance regulations at 7 CFR parts 3015, 3016, 3017, 3018, 3019, and 3052, as applicable, and to address their ability to comply with these requirements in their applications. *c. Regulatory and other approvals:* The applicant must identify any other regulatory or other approvals required by other Federal, State, local, or tribal agencies, or by private entities as a condition of financing that are necessary to carry out the proposed grant project and its estimated schedule for obtaining the necessary approvals. *d. Benefits of the proposed project.* The applicant should describe how the proposed project would benefit the target area and eligible communities. The description must specifically address how the project will improve energy generation, transmission, or distribution facilities serving the target area. The applicant should clearly identify how the project addresses the energy needs of the community and include appropriate measures of project success such as, for example, expected reductions in household or community energy costs, avoided cost increases, enhanced reliability, or economic or social benefits from improvements in energy services available to the target community. The applicant should include quantitative estimates of cost or energy savings and other benefits. The applicant should provide documentation or references to support its statements about cost-effectiveness savings and improved services. The applicant should also describe how it plans to measure and monitor the effectiveness of the program in delivering its projected benefits. *7. Proposed Project Budget.* The applicant must submit a proposed budget for the grant program on SF 424A, “Budget Information—Non-Construction Programs” or SF-424C, “Standard Form for Budget Information—Construction Programs,” as applicable. All applicants that submit applications through *Grants.gov* must use SF-424A. The applicant should supplement the budget summary form with more detailed information describing the basis for cost estimates. The detailed budget estimate should itemize and explain major proposed project cost components such as, but not limited to, the expected costs of design and engineering and other professional services, personnel costs (salaries/wages and fringe benefits), equipment, materials, property acquisition, travel (if any), and other direct costs, and indirect costs, if any. The budget must document that planned administrative and other expenses of the project sponsor that are not directly related to performance of the grant will not total more than 4 percent of grant funds. The applicant must also identify the source and amount of any other Federal or non-Federal contributions of funds or services that will be used to support the proposed project. This program does not require supplemental or matching funds for eligibility; however, the Agency will award additional rating points for programs that include a match of other funds or like-kind contributions to support the project. *8. Supplementary Material.* The applicant may append any additional information relevant to the proposal or which may qualify the application for extra points under the evaluation criteria described in this NOFA. *Part C. Additional Required Forms and Certifications.* In order to establish compliance with other Federal requirements for financial assistance, the applicant must execute and submit with the initial application the following forms and certifications: • SF 424B, “Assurances—Non-Construction Programs” or SF 424D, “Assurances—Construction Programs” (as applicable). All applicants applying through *Grants.gov* must use form SF 424B. • SF LLL, “Disclosure of Lobbying Activities.” • “Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension and Other Responsibility Matter—Primary Covered Transactions” as required under 7 CFR part 3017, Appendix A. Certifications for individuals, corporations, nonprofit entities, Indian tribes, partnerships. • Environmental Profile. The Agency environmental profile template included in the Application Guide solicits information about project characteristics and site-specific conditions that may involve environmental, historic preservation, and other resources. The profile will be used by the Agency's environmental staff to identify selected projects that may require additional environmental reviews, assessments, or environmental impact statements before a final grant award may be approved. A copy of the environmental profile and instructions for completion are included in the Application Guide and may be downloaded from the Agency Web site or *Grants.gov.* B. Special Requirements for Applicants Requesting Reconsideration of an Application Submitted in 2007 Applicants that wish to request reconsideration of their application packages submitted in response to the NOFA published on August 17, 2007 in this round of competitive funding must submit an updated original SF 424, including new mandatory data elements (DUNS number, fax number, and email address) along with a brief signed letter request for reconsideration identifying any additional information that they wish to be considered by the rating panel in reviewing their application along with supporting documentation. Applicants must confirm that their community continues to meet the eligibility benchmarks in Table 1 and may submit additional information to support their continued eligibility. The required application package will consist of the original signed SF 424, the request for reconsideration, and any additional supporting documents, plus the original application package submitted to the Agency in 2007. The Agency has maintained these prior applications on file and will add the newly submitted material to the existing application package for review by the rating panel. You do not need to send a copy of the 2007 application package. Because this abbreviated application package differs from the general application package for first time applicants available through *Grants.gov,* applicants requesting reconsideration should submit their requests directly to the Agency by the application deadline and not through *Grants.gov.* Applicants that submitted an application in 2007 also have the option of submitting an entirely new complete application package for their project in response to this NOFA. 3. Additional Information Requests In addition to the information required to be submitted in the application package, the Agency may request that successful grant applicants provide additional information, analyses, forms and certifications as a condition of pre-award clearance, including any environmental reviews or other reviews or certifications required under USDA and Government-wide assistance regulations. The Agency will advise the applicant in writing of any additional information required. 4. Submitting the Application Applicants that are submitting paper application packages must submit one original application package that includes original signatures on all required forms and certifications and two copies. Applications should be submitted on 8 1/2 by 11 inch white paper. Supplemental materials, such as maps, charts, plans, and photographs may exceed this size requirement. A completed paper application package must contain all required parts in the order indicated in the above section on “Content and Form of Application Submission.” The application package should be paginated either sequentially or by section. Applicants are requested to provide the application package in single-sided format for ease of copying. Applicants that are submitting application packages electronically through the federal grants portal *Grants.gov* ( *http://www.Grants.gov* ) must follow the application requirements and procedures and use the forms provided there. The *Grants.gov* Web site contains full instructions on all required registration, passwords, credentialing and software required to submit applications electronically. *Grants.gov* has streamlined the registration and credentialing process and now requires separate application processes for individuals and organizations. Individual applicants, including individuals applying on behalf of an organization, should follow the special directions for individuals on the *Grants.gov* Web site. Organizational applicants and sole proprietorships should follow the instructions for organizations. Organizational applicants are advised that completion of the requirements for registration with *Grants.gov,* with the Central Contractor Registry, and e-Authentication required under *Grants.gov* may take a week or more and may be delayed. Accordingly, the Agency strongly recommends that you complete your organization's registration with *Grants.gov* well in advance of the deadline for submitting applications. USDA encourages both individual and organizational applicants who wish to apply through *Grants.gov* to submit their applications in advance of the deadlines. Early submittal will give you time to resolve any system problems or technical difficulties with an electronic application through the customer support resources available at the *Grants.gov* Web site while preserving the option of submitting a timely paper application if any difficulties cannot be resolved. 5. Disclosure of Information All material submitted by the applicant may be made available to the public in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552) and USDA's implementing regulations at 7 CFR part 1. 6. Submission Dates and Times Applications must be postmarked or hand delivered to the Agency or posted to *Grants.gov* by March 28, 2008. The Agency will begin accepting applications on the date of publication of this NOFA. The Agency will accept for review all applications postmarked or delivered to us by this deadline. Late applications will not be considered and will be returned to the applicant. For the purposes of determining the timeliness of an application the Agency will accept the following as valid postmarks: The date stamped by the United States Postal Service on the outside of the package containing the application delivered by U.S. Mail; the date the package was received by a commercial delivery service as evidenced by the delivery label; the date received via hand delivery to the Agency headquarters; and the date an electronic application was posted for submission to *Grants.gov.* 7. Intergovernmental Review This program is not subject to the requirements of Executive Order 12372, “Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs,” as implemented under USDA's regulations at 7 CFR part 3015. 8. Funding Restrictions Section 19 of the RE Act provides that no more than 4 percent of the grant funds may be used for the planning and administrative expenses of the grantee not directly related to the grant project. 9. Other Submission Requirements Applicants that are submitting paper applications must submit one original application package that includes original signatures on all required forms and certifications and two copies. Applications should be single-sided and submitted on 8 1/2 by 11 inch white paper. Supplemental materials, such as maps, charts, plans, and photographs may exceed this size requirement. A completed application for first time applicants must contain all required parts in the order indicated in the above section on “Content and Form of Application Submission.” The application package should be paginated either sequentially or by section. Applicants seeking reconsideration should follow the special instructions above. The completed paper application package and two copies must be delivered to the Agency headquarters in Washington, DC using United States Mail, overnight delivery service, or by hand to the following address: United States Department of Agriculture, Rural Development Electric Programs, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., STOP 1560, Room 5165 South Building, Washington, DC 20250-1560. Applications should be marked “Attention: High Energy Cost Community Grant Program.” Applicants are advised that regular mail deliveries to Federal Agencies, especially of oversized packages and envelopes, continue to be delayed because of increased security screening requirements. Applicants may wish to consider using Express Mail or a commercial overnight delivery service instead of regular mail. Applicants wishing to hand deliver or use courier services for delivery should contact the Agency representative in advance to arrange for building access. The Agency advises applicants that because of intensified security procedures at government facilities that any electronic media included in an application package may be damaged during security screening. If an applicant wishes to submit such materials, they should contact the Agency representative for additional information. The Agency will accept electronic applications through the Federal Web portal at *http://www.Grants.gov* . Applicants wishing to submit electronic applications through *Grants.gov* must follow the application procedures and submission requirements detailed on that Web site at *http://www.Grants.gov* . Applicants that file through *Grants.gov* should receive electronic confirmation from *Grants.gov* that their applications have been received within 48 hours of submitting the application. *Grants.gov* will send a second electronic message that the application has either been successfully accepted by the system for transmission to the grantor agency OR has been rejected due to errors. After the grant application deadline has passed, USDA will send an electronic confirmation acknowledging that the application has been received by the Agency from *Grants.gov.* *Grants.gov* will not accept applications for filing after the deadline has passed. The Agency will not accept applications directly over the Internet, by e-mail, or fax. Applicants should be aware that *Grants.gov* requires that applicants complete several preliminary registrations and e-authentication requirements before being allowed to submit applications electronically. Applicants should consult the *Grants.gov* Web site and allow ample time to complete the steps required for registration before submitting their applications. Applicants may download application materials and complete forms online through *Grants.gov* without completing the registration requirements. Application materials prepared online may be printed and submitted in paper to the Agency as detailed above. 10. Multiple Applications Eligible applicants may submit only one application per project. Multiple tasks and localities may be included in a single proposed grant project. No more than $5 million in grant funds will be awarded per project application. Applicants may, however, submit applications for more than one project. V. Application Review Information All applications for grants must be delivered to the Agency at the address listed above or postmarked no later than March 28, 2008 to be eligible. After the deadline has passed, the Agency will review each timely-submitted application to determine whether it is complete and meets all of the eligibility requirements described in this NOFA. After the application closing date, the Agency will not consider any unsolicited information from the applicant. The Agency may contact the applicant for additional information or to clarify statements in the application required to establish applicant or community eligibility and completeness. Only applications that are complete and meet the eligibility criteria will be considered. The Agency will not accept or solicit any additional information relating to the technical merits and/or economic feasibility of the grant proposal after the application closing date. If the Agency determines that an application package was not delivered to the Agency, or postmarked on or before the deadline of March 28, 2008, the application will be rejected as untimely and returned to the applicant. After review, the Agency will reject any application package that it determines is incomplete or that does not demonstrate that the applicant, community or project is eligible under the requirements of this NOFA and program regulations. The Assistant Administrator, Electric Programs will notify the applicant of the rejection in writing and provide a brief explanation of the reasons for rejection. Applicants may appeal the rejection pursuant to program regulations on appeals at 7 CFR 1709.6. The appeal must be made, in writing to the Agency Administrator, within 10 days after the applicant is notified of the determination to reject the application. The appeal must state the basis for the appeal. Under 7 CFR 1709.6 appeals must be directed to the Administrator, Rural Utilities Service, Rural Development Utilities Programs, United States Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Ave., SW., STOP 1500, Washington, DC 20250-1500. The Administrator will review the appeal to determine whether to sustain, reverse, or modify the original determination by the Assistant Administrator. The Administrator's decision shall be final. A written copy of the Administrator's decision will be furnished promptly to the applicant. The Agency may establish one or more rating panels to review and rate the eligible grant applications. These panels may include persons not currently employed by USDA. The panel will evaluate and rate all complete applications that meet the eligibility requirements using the selection criteria and weights described in this NOFA. As part of the proposal review and ranking process, panel members may make comments and recommendations for appropriate conditions on grant awards to promote successful performance of the grant or to assure compliance with other Federal requirements. The decision to include panel recommendations on grant conditions in any grant award will be at the sole discretion of the Administrator. All applications will be scored and ranked according to the evaluation criteria and weightings described in this Notice. The evaluation criteria and weights in this NOFA differ from those used in prior NOFAs. For this reason, the ratings panel will review and revise scores of any prior applications that are being reconsidered according to the new criteria. The rating panel may revise the score upward based on any updated information submitted by the applicant. The Agency will use the ratings and recommendations of the panel to rank applicants against other applicants. All applicants will be ranked according to their scores in this round. The rankings and recommendations will then be forwarded to the Administrator for final review and selection. Decisions on grant awards will be made by the Agency Administrator based on the application, and the rankings and recommendations of the rating panel. The Administrator will fund grant requests in rank order to the extent of available funds. If sufficient funds are not available to fund the next ranked project, the Administrator may in his sole discretion, offer a partial award to the next project, or skip over that project to the next ranking project that can be supported with available funding. Should additional funds become available, the Administrator may in his sole discretion, make additional awards to unfunded applications submitted under this NOFA in rank order. 1. Criteria The Agency will use the selection criteria described in this NOFA to evaluate and rate applications and will award points up to the maximum number indicated under each criterion. Applicants should carefully read the information on the rating criteria in this NOFA and the Application Guide and address all criteria. The maximum number of points that can be awarded is 100 points. The Agency will award up to 65 points for project design and technical merit criteria and up to 35 points based on priority criteria for project or community characteristics that support USDA Rural Development and Agency program priorities. A. Project Design and Technical Merit Criteria Reviewers will consider the soundness of applicant's approach, the technical feasibility of the project, the adequacy of financial and other resources, the competence and experience of the applicant and its team, the project goals and objectives, and community needs and benefits. A total of 65 points may be awarded under these criteria. *1. Comprehensiveness and feasibility of approach. (Up to 30 points).* Raters will assess the technical and economic feasibility of the project and how well its goals and objectives address the challenges of the extremely high energy cost community. The panel will review the proposed design, construction, equipment, and materials for the community energy facilities in establishing technical feasibility. Reviewers may propose additional conditions on the grant award to assure that the project is technically sound. Reviewers will consider the adequacy of the applicant's budget and resources to carry out the project as proposed and how the applicant proposes to manage available resources such as other grants, program income, and any other financing sources to maintain and operate a financially viable project once the grant period has ended. *2. Demonstrated experience. (Up to 10 points).* Reviewers will consider whether the applicant and its project team have demonstrated experience in successfully administering and carrying out projects that are comparable to that proposed in the grant application. The Agency supports and encourages emerging organizations that desire to develop the internal capacity to improve energy services in rural communities. In evaluating the capabilities of entities without extensive experience in carrying out such projects, the Agency will consider the experience of the project team and the effectiveness of the program design in compensating for lack of extensive experience. *3. Community Needs. (Up to 15 points).* Reviewers will consider the applicant's identification and documentation of eligible communities, their populations, and assessment of community energy needs to be addressed by the grant project. Information on the severity of physical and economic challenges affecting eligible communities will be considered. Reviewers will weigh:
(1)The applicant's analysis of community energy challenges and
(2)why the applicant's proposal presents a greater need for Federal assistance than other competing applications. In assessing the applicant's demonstration of community needs, the rating panel will consider information in the narrative proposal addressing:
(a)The burden placed on the community and individual households by extremely high energy costs as evidenced by such quantitative measures as, for example, total energy expenditures, per unit energy costs, energy cost intensity for occupied space, or energy costs as a share of average household income, and persistence of extremely high energy costs compared to national or statewide averages.
(b)The hardships created by limited access to reliable and affordable energy services; and
(c)The availability of other resources to support or supplement the proposed grant funding. *4. Project Evaluation Methods. (Up to 5 points).* Reviewers will consider the applicant's plan to evaluate and report on the success and cost-effectiveness of financed activities and whether the results obtained will contribute to program improvements for the applicant or for other entities interested in similar programs. *5. Coordination with State Rural Development Initiatives. (Up to 5 points).* Raters will assess how effectively the proposed project is coordinated with State rural development initiatives, if any, and is consistent with and supports these efforts. The Agency will consider the documentation submitted for coordination efforts, community support, and State or local government recommendations. Applicants should identify the extent to which the project is dependent on or tied to other rural development initiatives, funding, and approvals. Applicants are advised that they should address this criterion explicitly even if only to report that the project is not coordinated with or supporting a State rural development initiative. Failure to address this criterion will result in zero points awarded. B. Priority Criteria In addition to the points awarded for project design and technical merit, all proposals will be reviewed and awarded additional points based on certain characteristics of the project or the target community. USDA Rural Development policies generally encourage agencies to give priority in their programs to rural areas of greatest need and to support other Federal policy initiatives. In furtherance of these policies, the Agency will award additional points for the priorities identified in this notice. The priority criteria and point scores used in this NOFA are consistent with the program regulations in 7 CFR part 1709. The Agency will give priority consideration to smaller communities, areas suffering significant economic hardship, areas with inadequate community energy services, and areas where the condition of community energy facilities (or absence thereof) presents an imminent hazard to public health or safety. Priority points will also be awarded for proposals that include cost sharing. A maximum of 35 total points may be awarded under these priority criteria. *1. Economic Hardship. (Up to 15 points).* The community experiences one or more economic hardship conditions that impair the ability of the community and/or its residents to provide basic energy services or to reduce or limit the costs of these services. Economic hardship will be assessed using either the objective measure of county median income under Option A below or subjectively under Option B based on the applicant's description of the community's economic hardships and supporting materials. Applicants may elect either measure, but not both. *Option A. Economically Distressed Communities. (Up to 15 points).* The target community is an economically distressed county or Indian reservation where the median household income is significantly below the State average. Points will be awarded based on the county percentage of State median household income (or reservation percentage of State median household income in the case of Federally recognized Indian reservations) according to the following:
(1)Less than 70 percent of the State median household income, 15 points;
(2)70 to 80 percent of the State median household income, 12 points;
(3)80 to 90 percent of the State median household income, 10 points;
(4)90 to 95 percent of the State median household income, 5 points; or
(5)over 95 percent of the State median household income, 0 points. Information on State and county median income is available online from the USDA Economic Research Service at *http://www.ers.usda.gov/data/unemployment/* . Information on Indian reservations is available through the U.S. Census at *http://www.census.gov* . *Option B. Other Economic Hardship. (Up to 15 points).* The community suffers from other conditions creating a severe economic hardship that is adequately described and documented by the applicant. Examples include but are not limited to natural disasters, financially distressed local industry, and loss of major local employer, persistent poverty, outmigration, or other conditions adversely affecting the local economy, or contributing to unserved or underserved energy infrastructure needs that affect the economic health of the community. The rating panel may assign points under this criterion, in lieu of awarding points based on the percentage of median household income. *2. Rurality. (Up to 14 points).* Consistent with the Rural Development policy to target resources to rural communities with significant needs and recognizing that smaller communities are often comparatively disadvantaged in seeking assistance, reviewers will award additional points based on the rurality (as measured by population) of the target communities to be served with grant funds. Applications will be scored based on the population of the largest incorporated cities, towns, or villages, or census designated places included within the grant's proposed target area. Points will be awarded on the population of the largest target community within the proposed target area as follows:
(A)2,500 or less, 14 points;
(B)Between 2,501 and 5,000, inclusive, 12 points;
(C)Between 5,001 and 10,000, inclusive, 8 points;
(D)Between 10,001 and 15,000, inclusive, 5 points;
(E)Between 15,001 and 20,000, inclusive, 2 points; and
(F)Above 20,000, 0 points. Applicants must use the latest available population figures from Census 2000 available at *http://www.census.gov/main/www/cen2000.html* for every incorporated city, town, or village, or Census designated place included in the target area. *3. Unserved Energy Needs. (2 points).* Consistent with the purposes of the RE Act, projects that meet unserved or underserved energy needs will be eligible for 2 points. Examples of proposals that may qualify under this priority include projects that extend or improve electric or other energy services to communities and customers that do not have reliable centralized or commercial service or where many homes remain without such service because the costs are unaffordable. *4. Imminent hazard. (2 points).* If the grant proposal involves a project to correct a condition posing an imminent hazard to public safety, welfare, the environment, or to a critical community or residential energy facility, raters may award 2 points. Examples include community energy facilities in immediate danger of failure because of deteriorated condition, capacity limitations, damage from natural disasters or accidents, or other conditions where impending failure of existing facilities or absence of energy facilities creates a substantial threat to public health or safety, or to the environment. *5. Cost Sharing. (2 points).* This grant program does not require any cost contribution. In addition to their assessment of the economic feasibility and sustainability of the project under the project evaluation factors above, raters may award 2 points for cost sharing. These points will be awarded when the proposal documents supplemental contributions of funds, property, equipment, services, or other in kind contributions for the project evidencing the applicant's and/or community's commitment to the project that taken together exceed 10 percent of the total project costs. The applicant must specifically request additional points for cost sharing. 2. Review and Selection Process A. Scoring and Ranking of Applications Following the evaluation and rating of individual applications under the above criteria, the rating panel will rank the applications in numerical order according to their total scores. The scored and ranked applications and the raters' comments will then be forwarded to the Administrator for review and selection of grant awards. B. Selection of Grant Awards and Notification of Applicants The Agency Administrator will review the rankings and recommendations of the applications provided by the rating panel for consistency with the requirements of this NOFA. The Administrator may return any application to the rating panel with written instruction for reconsideration if, in his sole discretion, he finds that the scoring of an application is inconsistent with this NOFA and the directions provided to the rating panel. Following any adjustments to the project rankings as a result of reconsideration, the Administrator will select projects for funding in rank order. If funds remain after funding the highest ranking application, the Agency may fund all or part of the next highest ranking application. The Agency will advise an applicant if it cannot fully fund a grant request and ask whether the applicant will accept a reduced award. The Administrator may decide based on the recommendations of the rating panel or in his sole discretion that a grant award may be made fully or partially contingent upon the applicant satisfying certain conditions or providing additional information and analyses. For example, the Agency may defer approving a final award to a selected project—such as projects requiring more extensive environmental review and mitigation, preparation of detailed site specific engineering studies and designs, or requiring local permitting, or availability of supplemental financing—until any additional conditions are satisfied. In the event that a selected applicant fails to comply with the additional conditions within the time set by the Agency, the selection will be vacated and the next ranking project will be considered. If a selected applicant turns down a grant award offer, or fails to conclude a grant agreement acceptable to the Agency, or to provide required information requested by the Agency within the time period established in the notification of selection for grant award, the Agency Administrator may select for funding the next highest ranking application submitted in response to this NOFA. If sufficient funds are not available to fund the next ranked project, the Administrator may in his sole discretion, offer a partial award to the next project, or skip over that project to the next ranking project that can be supported with available funding. Should additional funds become available in Fiscal Year 2007 or in a subsequent Fiscal Year prior to the next solicitation of competitive grant applications, the Administrator may in his sole discretion, make additional awards to unfunded applications submitted under this NOFA in rank order. The Agency will notify each applicant in writing whether or not it has been selected for an award. The Agency's written notice to a successful applicant of the amount of the grant award based on the approved application will constitute the Agency's preliminary acceptance of a project for an award, subject to compliance with all post-selection requirements including but not limited to completion of any environmental reviews and negotiation and execution of a grant agreement satisfactory to the Agency. This preliminary acceptance does not bind the Government to making a final grant award. Only a final grant award and agreement executed by the Administrator will constitute a binding obligation and commitment of Federal funds. Funds will not be awarded or disbursed until all requirements have been satisfied and are contingent on the continued availability of appropriated funds at the time of the award. The Agency will advise selected applicants of additional requirements or conditions. C. Adjustments to Funding The Agency reserves the right to fund less than the full amount requested in a grant application to ensure the fair distribution of the funds and to ensure that the purposes of a specific program are met. The Agency will not fund any portion of a grant request that is not eligible for funding under Federal statutory or regulatory requirements; that does not meet the requirements of this NOFA, or that may duplicate other Agency-funded activities, including electric loans. Only the eligible portions of a successful grant application will be funded. Grant assistance cannot exceed the lower of:
(a)The qualifying percentage of eligible project costs requested by the applicant; or
(b)The minimum amount sufficient to provide for the economic feasibility of the project as determined by the Agency. VI. Award Administration Information 1. Award Notices. The Agency will notify all applicants in writing whether they have been selected for an award. Successful applicants will be advised in writing of their selection as award finalists. Successful applicants will be required to negotiate a grant agreement acceptable to the Agency and complete additional grant forms and certifications required by USDA as part of the pre-award process. Depending on the nature of the activities proposed by the application, the grantee may be asked to provide information and certifications necessary for compliance with The Agency's environmental policy regulations and procedures for Electric Programs at 7 CFR part 1794. Following completion of the environmental review, selected applicants will receive a letter of conditions establishing any project-specific conditions to be included in the grant agreement and asked to execute a letter of intent to meet the grant conditions or to detail why such conditions can't be met and to propose alternatives. Grant funds will not be advanced unless and until the applicant has executed a grant agreement acceptable to the Agency. The Agency will require each successful applicant to agree to the specific terms of each grant agreement, a project budget, and other program requirements. In cases where the Agency cannot successfully conclude negotiations with a selected applicant or a selected applicant fails to provide requested information within the time specified, an award will not be made to that applicant. The selection will be revoked and the Agency may offer an award to the next highest ranking applicant, and proceed with negotiations with the next highest ranking applicant, subject to the availability of funds. 2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements A. Environmental Review and Restriction on Certain Activities Grant awards are required to comply with 7 CFR part 1794, which sets forth Agency regulations implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Grantees must also agree to comply with any other Federal or State environmental laws and regulations applicable to the grant project. If the proposed grant project involves physical development activities or property acquisition, the applicant is generally prohibited from acquiring, rehabilitating, converting, leasing, repairing or constructing property or facilities, or committing or expending Agency or non-Agency funds for proposed grant activities until the Agency has completed any environmental review in accordance with 7 CFR part 1794 or determined that no environmental review is required. Successful applicants will be advised whether additional environmental review and requirements apply to their proposals. B. Other Federal Requirements Other Federal statutes and regulations apply to grant applications and to grant awards. These include, but are not limited to, requirements under 7 CFR part 15, subpart A—Nondiscrimination in Federally Assisted Programs of the Department of Agriculture—Effectuation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Certain Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)circulars also apply to USDA grant programs and must be followed by a grantee under this program. The policies, guidance, and requirements of the following, or their successors, may apply to the award, acceptance and use of assistance under this program and to the remedies for noncompliance, except when inconsistent with the provisions of the Agriculture, Rural Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Acts, other Federal statutes or the provisions of this NOFA: • OMB Circular No. A-87 (Cost Principles Applicable to Grants, Contracts and Other Agreements with State and Local Governments); • OMB Circular A-21 (Cost Principles for Education Institutions); • OMB Circular No. A-122 (Cost Principles for Nonprofit Organizations); • OMB Circular A-133 (Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations); • 7 CFR part 3015 (Uniform Federal Assistance Regulations); • 7 CFR part 3016 (Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State, Local, and Federally recognized Indian tribal governments); • 7 CFR part 3017 (Government-wide debarment and suspension (non-procurement) and • Government-wide requirements for drug-free workplace (grants)); • 7 CFR part 3018 (New restrictions on Lobbying); • 7 CFR part 3019 (Uniform administrative requirements for grants and Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and other Non-Profit Organizations); and • 7 CFR part 3052 (Audits of States, local governments, and non-profit organizations). Compliance with additional OMB Circulars or government-wide regulations may be specified in the grant agreement. 3. Reporting The grantee will be required to provide periodic financial and performance reports under USDA grant regulations and program rules and to submit a final project performance report. The nature and frequency of required reports are established in USDA grant regulations and the project-specific grant agreements. VII. Agency Contact The Agency Contact for this grant announcement is Karen Larsen, Management Analyst, United States Department of Agriculture, Rural Development Electric Program, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., STOP 1560, Room 5165 South Building, Washington, DC 20250-1560. Telephone 202-720-9545, Fax 202-690-0717, e-mail *Karen.Larsen@usda.gov.* Dated: January 11, 2008. James M. Andrew, Administrator, Rural Utilities Service. [FR Doc. E8-1381 Filed 1-25-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-15-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Rural Utilities Service Announcement of Funding Availability and Solicitation of Applications AGENCY: Rural Utilities Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice of Funding Availability and Solicitation of Applications. SUMMARY: The Rural Utilities Service, an agency delivering the United States Department of Agriculture's
(USDA)Rural Development Utilities Programs, hereinafter referred to as Rural Development and/or Agency, announces its Distance Learning and Telemedicine
(DLT)grant, combination loan-grant and loan program application windows for Fiscal Year
(FY)2008. In addition to announcing the application windows, the Agency announces the available funding and the minimum and maximum amounts for DLT grants, combination loan-grants and loans applicable for the fiscal year. The Distance Learning and Telemedicine Grant Program was authorized by the 1990 Farm Bill to provide grants to rural schools and health care providers. The 1996 Farm Bill reauthorized the Distance Learning and Telemedicine Grant Program and established a new loan component. The Distance Learning and Telemedicine
(DLT)Program is specifically designed to meet the educational and health care needs of rural America through the use of advanced telecommunications technologies. DATES: You may submit completed applications for grants on paper or electronically according to the following deadlines: • Paper copies must be postmarked and mailed, shipped, or sent overnight *no later* than April 14, 2008 to be eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. Late or incomplete applications will not be eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. • Electronic copies must be received by April 14, 2008 to be eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. Late or incomplete applications will not be eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. ADDRESSES: You may obtain copies of the FY 2008 application guides and materials for the DLT grant program may be obtained at the following sources: • The DLT Web site: *http://www.usda.gov/rus/telecom/dlt/dlt.htm,* • Contacting the DLT Program at
(202)720-0413. • Paper applications are to be submitted to Rural Development Utilities Programs, United States Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Ave., SW., Room 2845, STOP 1550, Washington, DC 20250-1550. Applications should be marked “Attention: Director, Advanced Services Division, Telecommunications Program.” Electronic applications may be submitted through Grants.gov. Information on how to submit applications electronically is available on the Grants.gov Web site ( *http://www.grants.gov* ). Applicants must successfully pre-register with Grants.gov to use the electronic applications option. Application information may be downloaded from Grants.gov without preregistration. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Director, Advanced Services Division, Telecommunications Program, Rural Development Utilities Programs, United States Department of Agriculture, telephone:
(202)720-0413, fax:
(202)720-1051. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Overview *Federal Agency:* Rural Utilities Service (RUS). *Funding Opportunity Title:* Distance Learning and Telemedicine Grants, Combination Loan-grants, and Loans. *Announcement Type:* Initial announcement. *Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
(CFDA)Number:* 10.855. DATES: You may submit completed applications for grants on paper or electronically according to the following deadlines: • Paper copies must be postmarked and mailed, shipped, or sent overnight no later than April 14, 2008 to be eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. Late or incomplete applications are not eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. • Electronic copies must be received by April 14, 2008 to be eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. Late or incomplete applications are not eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. Items in Supplementary Information *I. Funding Opportunity:* Brief introduction to the DLT program. *II. Minimum and Maximum Application Amounts:* Projected Available Funding. *III. Eligibility Information:* Who is eligible, what kinds of projects are eligible, what criteria determine basic eligibility. *IV. Application and Submission Information:* Where to get application materials, what constitutes a completed application, how and where to submit applications, deadlines, items that are eligible. *V. Application Review Information:* Considerations and preferences, scoring criteria, review standards, selection information. *VI. Award Administration Information:* Award notice information, award recipient reporting requirements. *VII. Agency Contacts:* Web, phone, fax, e-mail, contact name. I. Funding Opportunity Distance learning and telemedicine loans and grants are specifically designed to provide access to education, training and health care resources for people in rural America. The Distance Learning and Telemedicine
(DLT)Program provides financial assistance to encourage and improve telemedicine services and distance learning services in rural areas through the use of telecommunications, computer networks, and related advanced technologies by students, teachers, medical professionals, and rural residents. Grants, which are awarded through a competitive process, may be used to fund telecommunications-enabled information, audio and video equipment and related advanced technologies which extend educational and medical applications into rural locations. Grants are made for projects where the benefit is primarily delivered to end users that are not at the same location as the source of the education or health care service. As in years past, the FY 2008 grant application guide has been changed to reflect recent changes in technology and application trends. Details of changes from the FY 2007 application guide are highlighted throughout this Notice and described in full in the FY 2008 application guide. All applicants must carefully review and *exactly* follow the FY 2008 application guide and sample materials when compiling a DLT grant application. Applications for loans and combination loan-grants are not competitively scored. In addition to the items listed for grants, loans and combination loan-grants may be used to fund projects where the benefit is primarily at the same location as the source of the service. Loans and combination loan-grants may also fund construction of necessary transmission facilities on a technology-neutral basis. Examples of such facilities include satellite uplinks, microwave towers and associated structures, T-1 lines, DS-3 lines, and other similar facilities. Loan funds may also be used to obtain mobile units and for some building construction. Please see 7 CFR 1703, Subparts D, E, F and G for specifics. A new combination loan-grant program was initiated in FY 2007 for Electronic Medical Records systems. This program was well received and will continue for FY 2008 with no modification. The special loan-to-grant ratio of 4:1 remains in effect for FY 2008, as well. II. Maximum and Minimum Amount of Applications; Projected Available Funding The Administrator has determined that in FY 2008 the amount of $29,790,000 is available for all grants, both 100% grants and combination loan-grants. Of this, the Administrator anticipates that $24,763,815 will be available for 100% grants. He anticipates that the balance will be used for combination loan-grants as described below. The Administrator has determined the maximum amount of an application for a 100% grant in FY 2008 is $500,000 and the minimum amount of a grant is $50,000. The Administrator has determined that there is a total of $28,265,371 available for 100% loans and combination loan-grants. He anticipates that this will be divided among 100% loans and combination loan-grants based on applications already received and on those that will be submitted during the fiscal year. The Administrator anticipates that 100% loan and combination loan-grant applications already received will require $4,649,000 in loan dollars and $526,185 in grant dollars, for a total of $5,175,185. Under 7 CFR 1703.143, the Administrator has determined the maximum amount of an application for a 100% loan in FY 2008 is $10 million and the minimum amount of a 100% loan is $50,000. Combination loan-grants will be offered at a loan-to-grant ratio of 9:1, i.e. $9 in loan to $1 in grant. Under 7 CFR 1703.133, the Administrator has determined the maximum amount of an application for a combination loan-grant in FY 2008 is $10 million and the minimum amount of a combination loan-grant is $50,000. For this program, the Administrator has anticipated that $13,500,000 in loans will be paired with $1,500,000 in grants, for a total available of $15 million. For projects that are for electronic medical records systems, combination loan-grants will be offered at a special rate. The loan-to-grant ratio for the special ratio combination loan-grant program will be 4:1, i.e. $4 in loan to $1 in grant. Under 7 CFR 1703.133, the Administrator has determined the maximum amount of a special ratio combination loan-grant application is $1 million, and the minimum amount is $50,000. For this special ratio program, the Administrator has anticipated that $10 million in loans will be paired with $2,500,000 in grants, for a total available of $12,500,000. DLT grants, combination loan-grants and loans cannot be renewed. Award documents specify the term of each award. Rural Development will make awards and execute documents appropriate to the project prior to any advance of funds to successful applicants. Applications to extend existing projects are welcomed (100% grant applications must be submitted during the application window) and will be evaluated as new applications. III. Eligibility Information A. Who is eligible for grants, combination loan-grants, and loans? (See 7 CFR 1703.103.) 1. Only entities legally organized as one of the following are eligible for DLT financial assistance: a. An incorporated organization or partnership, b. An Indian tribe or tribal organization, as defined in 25 U.S.C. 450b(b) and (c), c. A state or local unit of government, d. A consortium, as defined in 7 CFR 1703.102, or e. Other legal entity, including a private corporation organized on a for-profit or not-for-profit basis. 2. Individuals are not eligible for DLT program financial assistance directly. 3. Electric and telecommunications borrowers under the Rural Electrification Act of 1936 (7 U.S.C. 950aaa et seq.) are not eligible for grants or combination loan-grants, but are eligible for loans. B. What are the basic eligibility requirements for a project? 1. Required matching contributions for grants: See 7 CFR 1703.125(g) and the FY 2008 application guide for information on required matching contributions. a. Grant applicants must demonstrate matching contributions, in cash or in kind (new, non-depreciated items), of at least fifteen
(15)percent of the total amount of financial assistance requested. Matching contributions *must* be used for eligible purposes of DLT grant assistance (see 7 CFR 1703.121, paragraphs IV.H.1.b of this Notice and the FY 2008 application guide). b. Greater amounts of eligible matching contributions may increase an applicant's score (see 7 CFR 1703.126(b)(4), paragraph V.B.2.d of this notice, and the FY 2008 application guide). c. Applications that do not provide evidence of the required fifteen percent match which helps determine eligibility will be declared ineligible and returned. See paragraphs IV.H.1.c and V.B.2.d of this Notice, and the FY 2008 application guide for specific information on documentation of matching contributions. d. Applications that do not document all matching contributions are subject to budgetary adjustment by the Agency, which may result in rejection of an application as ineligible due to insufficient match. 2. The DLT loan, combination loan-grant and grant programs are designed to flow the benefits of distance learning and telemedicine to residents of rural America (see 7 CFR 1703.103(a)(2)). Therefore, in order to be eligible, applicants must: a. Operate a rural community facility; or b. Deliver distance learning or telemedicine services to entities that operate a rural community facility or to residents of rural areas, at rates calculated to ensure that the benefit of the financial assistance is passed through to such entities or to residents of rural areas. 3. Rurality. a. All projects proposed for DLT grant assistance must meet a minimum rurality threshold, to ensure that benefits from the projects flow to rural residents. The minimum eligibility score is 20 points. Please see Section IV of this notice, 7 CFR 1703.126(a)(2), and the FY 2008 application guide for an explanation of the rurality scoring and eligibility criterion. b. Each application must apply the following criteria to each of its end-user sites, and hubs that are also proposed as end-user sites, in order to determine a rurality score. The rurality score is the average of all end-user sites' rurality scores. Criterion Character Population DLT points Exceptionally Rural Area Area not within an Urbanized Area or Urban Cluster ≤ 5,000 45 Rural Area Area in an Urban Cluster > 5,000 and ≤ 10,000 30 Mid-Rural Area Area in an Urban Cluster >10,000 and ≤ 20,000 15 Urban Area Area in an Urbanized Area or Urban Cluster > 20,000 0 c. The rurality score is one of the competitive scoring criteria applied to grant applications. 4. Projects located in areas covered by the Coastal Barrier Resources Act (16 U.S.C. 3501, *et seq.* ) are not eligible for financial assistance from the DLT Program. Please see 7 CFR 1703.123(a)(11), 7 CFR 1703.132(a)(5), and 7 CFR 1703.142(b)(3). C. See Section IV of this Notice and the FY 2008 application guide for a discussion of the items that make up a complete application. For requirements of completed applications you may also refer to 7 CFR 1703.125 for grant applications, 7 CFR 1703.134 for combination loan-grant applications, and 7 CFR 1703.144 for loan applications. The FY 2008 application guide provides specific, detailed instructions for each item that constitutes a complete application. The Agency strongly emphasizes the importance of *including every required item* (as explained in the FY 2008 application guide) and strongly encourages applicants to follow the instructions *exactly* , using the examples and illustrations in the FY 2008 application guide. Applications which do not include all items that determine project eligibility and applicant eligibility by the application deadline will be returned as ineligible. Applications that do not include all items necessary for scoring will be scored as is. Please see the FY 2008 application guide for a full discussion of each required item and for samples and illustrations. IV. Application and Submission Information A. *Where to get application information.* FY 2008 application guides, copies of necessary forms and samples, and the DLT Program regulation are available from these sources: 1. The Internet: *http://www.usda.gov/rus/telecom/dlt/dlt.htm* . 2. The DLT Program for paper copies of these materials:
(202)720-0413. B. *What's new for FY 2008?* 1. Applicants are reminded that end user sites are rural facilities. See 7 CFR 1703.102, Definitions, “End User” and “End User Site”. We have experienced an increase in the number of applications which attempt to include urban educational and medical facilities as end user sites. Urban facilities can serve as hub sites, but not end user sites. For projects with non-fixed end user sites, only those end user sites outside urban areas can be funded. The FY 2008 application guide contains clarifying language to elaborate on this provision of the regulation. 2. If a grant application includes a site that is included in any other DLT grant application for FY 2008, or a site that has been included in any DLT grant funded in FY 2007 or FY 2006, the application should contain a detailed explanation of the related applications or grants. The Agency must make a nonduplication finding for each grant approved, and apparent but unexplained duplication of funding for a site can prevent such a finding. C. What constitutes a completed application? 1. For DLT Grants: a. Detailed information on each item in the table in paragraph IV.C.1.f. of this Notice can be found in the sections of the DLT Program regulation listed in the table, and the DLT grant application guide. Applicants are strongly encouraged to read and apply both the regulation and the application guide.
(1)When the table refers to a narrative, it means a written statement, description or other written material prepared by the applicant, for which no form exists. Rural Development recognizes that each project is unique and requests narratives to allow applicants to explain their request for financial assistance.
(2)When documentation is requested, it means letters, certifications, legal documents or other third-party documentation that provide evidence that the applicant meets the listed requirement. For example, to confirm Enterprise Zone
(EZ)designations, applicants use various types of documents, such as letters from appropriate government bodies. Leveraging documentation generally will be letters of commitment from other funding sources. In-kind matches must be items purchased after the application deadline date that are essential to the project and documentation from the donor must demonstrate the relationship of each item to the project's function. Evidence of legal existence is sometimes proven by submitting articles of incorporation. None of the foregoing examples is intended to limit the types of documentation that may be submitted to fulfill a requirement. DLT Program regulations and the application guide provide specific guidance on each of the items in the table. b. The DLT application guide and ancillary materials provide all necessary forms and sample worksheets. c. While the table in paragraph IV.C.1.f of this Notice includes all items of a completed application, Rural Development may ask for additional or clarifying information for applications which, as submitted by the deadline, appear to clearly demonstrate that they meet eligibility requirements. d. Submit the required application items in the order provided in the FY 2008 application guide. The FY 2008 application guide specifies the format and order of all required items. Applications that are not assembled and tabbed in the order specified prevent timely determination of eligibility. Given the high volume of program interest, incorrectly assembled applications, and applications with inconsistency among submitted copies will be returned as ineligible. e. *DUNS Number.* As required by the OMB, all applicants for grants must supply a Dun and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System
(DUNS)number when applying. The Standard Form 424 (SF-424) contains a field for you to use when supplying your DUNS number. Obtaining a DUNS number costs nothing and requires a short telephone call to Dun and Bradstreet. Please see *http://www.grants.gov/applicants/request_duns_number.jsp* for more information on how to obtain a DUNS number or how to verify your organization's number. f. Compliance with other Federal statutes. The applicant must provide evidence of compliance with other Federal statutes and regulations, including, but not limited to the following:
(i)*7 CFR part 15, subpart A* —Nondiscrimination in Federally Assisted Programs of the Department of Agriculture—Effectuation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
(ii)*7 CFR part 3015* —Uniform Federal Assistance Regulations.
(iii)*7 CFR part 3017* —Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Non-procurement).
(iv)*7 CFR part 3018* —New Restrictions on Lobbying.
(v)7 CFR part 3021—Governmentwide Requirements for Drug-Free Workplace. g. *Table of Required Elements of a Completed Grant Application.* Application item Required items Grants (7 CFR 1703.125 and CFR 1703.126) Comment SF-424 (Application for Federal Assistance form) Yes *Completely* filled out. Executive Summary Yes Narrative. Objective Scoring Worksheet Yes RUS worksheet. Rural Calculation Table Yes RUS worksheet. National School Lunch Program Determination Yes RUS worksheet; must include source documentation. EZ/EC or Champion Communities designation Yes Documentation. Documented Need for Services/Benefits Derived from Services Yes Narrative & documentation, if necessary. Innovativeness of the Project Yes Narrative & documentation. Budget Yes Table or spreadsheet; Recommend using the RUS format. Leveraging Evidence and Funding Commitments from All Sources Yes RUS worksheet and source documentation. Financial Information/Sustainability Yes Narrative. System/Project Cost Effectiveness Yes Narrative & documentation. Telecommunications System Plan Yes Narrative & documentation; maps or diagrams, if appropriate. Proposed Scope of Work Yes Narrative or other appropriate format. Statement of Experience Yes Narrative 3-page, single-spaced limit. Consultation with the USDA State Director, Rural Development Yes Documentation. Application conforms with State Strategic Plan per USDA State Director, Rural Development, (if plan exists) Yes Documentation. Certifications: Equal Opportunity and Nondiscrimination Yes Recommend using the RUS sample form. Architectural Barriers Yes Recommend using the RUS sample form. Flood Hazard Area Precautions Yes Recommend using the RUS sample form. Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 Yes Recommend using the RUS sample form. Drug-Free Workplace Yes Recommend using the RUS sample form. Debarment, Suspension, and Other Responsibility Matters—Primary Covered Transactions Yes Recommend using the RUS sample form. Lobbying for Contracts, Grants, Loans, and Cooperative Agreements Yes Recommend using the RUS sample form. Non Duplication of Services Yes Recommend using the RUS sample form. Environmental Impact/Historic Preservation Certification Yes Recommend using the RUS sample form. Federal Obligations on Delinquent Debt Yes Recommend using the RUS sample form. Evidence of Legal Authority to Contract with the Government (documentation) Yes Recommend using the RUS sample form. Evidence of Legal Existence (documentation) Yes Recommend using the RUS sample form. Supplemental Information (if any) Optional Narrative, documentation or other appropriate format. 2. For combination loan-grant and loan applications: a. Detailed information on each item in the table in paragraph IV.C.2.f. of this Notice can be found in the sections of the DLT Program regulation listed in the table, and the DLT application guide. Applicants are strongly encouraged to read and apply both the regulation and the application guide.
(1)When the table refers to a narrative, it means a written statement, description or other written material prepared by the applicant, for which no form exists. The Agency recognizes that each project is unique and requests narratives to allow applicants to explain their request for financial assistance.
(2)When documentation is requested, it means letters, certifications, legal documents or other third party documentation that provide evidence that the applicant meets the listed requirement. For example, evidence of legal existence is sometimes proven by applicants who submit articles of incorporation. This example is not intended to limit the types of documentation that may be submitted to fulfill a requirement. DLT program regulations and the application guide provide specific guidance on each of the items in the table. b. The DLT application guide and ancillary materials provide all necessary forms and sample worksheets. c. While the table in paragraph IV.C.2.f. of this Notice includes all items of a completed application for each program, the Agency may ask for additional or clarifying information. d. Submit the required application items in the listed order. e. DUNS Number. As required by the OMB, all applicants for combination loan-grants must supply a Dun and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System
(DUNS)number when applying. The Standard Form 424 (SF-424) contains a field for you to use when supplying your DUNS number. Obtaining a DUNS number costs nothing and requires a short telephone call to Dun and Bradstreet. Please see the DLT Web site or Grants.gov for more information on how to obtain a DUNS number or how to verify your organization's number. f. Table of required items in a combination loan-grant or loan application: Application item Required items Combination loan/grants (7 CFR 1703.134) Loans Completed SF-424 (Application for Federal Assistance form) Yes Yes. Executive Summary (narrative) Yes Yes. Rural Calculation Table Yes Yes. Budget (table or other appropriate format) Yes Yes. Financial Information/Sustainability (narrative) Yes Yes. Pro Forma Financial Data (documentation) Yes Yes. Ability to execute a note with maturity greater than 1 year (documentation) Yes Yes. Budget Yes Yes. Revenue/expense reports and balance sheet (documentation: table or other appropriate format) Yes 1 Yes 1 . Balance sheet (table or other appropriate format) for a partnership, corporation, company, other entity; or consortia of such entities (documentation) Yes 2 Yes 2 . Property list (collateral/adequate security (documentation)) Yes Yes. Depreciation Schedule Yes Yes. Revenue source(s) for each hub and end-user site (documentation) Yes Yes. Economic analysis of rates—if applicant proposes to provide services for another entity Yes Yes. Telecommunications System Plan (narrative & documentation; maps or diagrams, if appropriate) Yes Yes. Scope of Work (narrative or other appropriate format) Yes Yes. Statement of Experience (narrative 3-page, single spaced limit) Yes Yes. Certifications: *Equal Opportunity and Nondiscrimination *Architectural Barriers *Flood Hazard Area Precautions *Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisitions Policies Act of 1970 *Drug Free Workplace *Debarment, Suspension, and Other Responsibility Matters—Primary Covered Transactions All Yes All Yes. *Lobbying for Contracts, Grants, Loans, and Cooperative Agreements *Non-Duplication of Services *Environmental Impact/Historic Preservation Certification *Environmental Impact/Historic Preservation Questionnaire *Federal Obligations on Delinquent Debt Evidence of Legal Authority to Contract with the Government (documentation) Yes Yes. Evidence of Legal Existance (documentation) Yes Yes. Supplemental Information (if any) (narrative, documentation or other appropriate format.) Optional Optional. D. How many copies of an application are required? 1. Applications submitted on paper. a. Submit the original application and two
(2)copies to USDA Rural Development. b. Submit one
(1)additional copy to the state government single point of contact
(SPOC)(if one has been designated) at the same time as you submit the application to the Agency. See *http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants/spoc.html* for an updated listing of State government single points of contact. 2. Electronically submitted applications. The Agency cannot accept loan applications electronically at this time. Only grants and combination loan-grants may be requested electronically. a. The additional paper copies are not necessary if you submit the application electronically through *Grants.gov* . b. Submit one
(1)copy to the state government single point of contact (if one has been designated) at the same time as you submit the application to the Agency. See *http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants/spoc.html* for an updated listing of State government single points of contact. E. *How and where to submit an application* . Grant and combination loan-grant applications may be submitted on paper or electronically. 1. Submitting applications on paper. a. Address paper applications to the Telecommunications Program, Rural Development, United States Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Ave., SW., Room 2845, STOP 1550, Washington, DC 20250-1550. Applications should be marked “Attention: Director, Advanced Services Division.” b. Paper grant applications must show proof of mailing or shipping by the deadline consisting of one of the following:
(i)A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service
(USPS)postmark;
(ii)A legible mail receipt with the date of mailing stamped by the USPS; or
(iii)A dated shipping label, invoice, or receipt from a commercial carrier. c. Due to screening procedures at the Department of Agriculture, packages arriving via regular mail through the USPS are irradiated, which can damage the contents and delay delivery to the DLT Program. Rural Development encourages applicants to consider the impact of this procedure in selecting their application delivery method. 2. Electronically submitted applications. a. Applications will not be accepted via fax or electronic mail. b. Electronic applications for grants and combination loan-grants will be accepted if submitted through the Federal government's *Grants.gov* initiative at *http://www.grants.gov* . c. How to use *Grants.gov* . (i). *Grants.gov* contains full instructions on all required passwords, credentialing and software.
(ii)Central Contractor Registry. Submitting an application through *Grants.gov* requires that you list your organization in the Central Contractor Registry (CCR). Setting up a CCR listing takes up to five business days, so the Agency strongly recommends that you obtain your organization's DUNS number and CCR listing well in advance of the deadline specified in this notice.
(iii)Credentialing and authorization of applicants. *Grants.gov* will also require some credentialing and online authentication procedures. These procedures may take several business days to complete, further emphasizing the need for early action by applicants to complete the sign-up, credentialing and authorization procedures at *Grants.gov* before you submit an application at that Web site.
(iv)Some or all of the CCR and *Grants.gov* registration, credentialing and authorizations require updates. If you have previously registered at *Grants.gov* to submit applications electronically, please ensure that your registration, credentialing and authorizations are up to date well in advance of the grant application deadline. d. Rural Development encourages applicants who wish to apply through *Grants.gov* to submit their applications in advance of the deadlines. e. If a system problem occurs or you have technical difficulties with an electronic application, please use the customer support resources available at the *Grants.gov* Web site. F. Deadlines 1. Paper grant applications must be postmarked and mailed, shipped, or sent overnight no later than April 14, 2008 to be eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. Late applications, applications which do not include proof of mailing or shipping as described in paragraph IV.E.b., and incomplete applications are not eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. 2. Electronic grant applications must be received by April 14, 2008 to be eligible for FY 2008 funding. Late or incomplete applications will not be eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. G. *Intergovernmental Review* . The DLT grant program is subject to Executive Order 12372, “Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs.” As stated in paragraph IV.D.1. of this Notice, a copy of a DLT grant application must be submitted to the state single point of contact if one has been designated. Please see *http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants/spoc.html* to determine whether your state has a single point of contact. H. Funding Restrictions 1. Eligible purposes. a. For grants, end-user sites may receive financial assistance; hub sites (rural or non-rural) may also receive financial assistance if they are necessary to provide DLT services to end-user sites. Please see 7 CFR 1703.101(h). b. To fulfill the policy goals laid out for the DLT Program in 7 CFR 1703.101, the following table lists purposes for financial assistance and whether each purpose is generally considered to be eligible for the form of financial assistance. Please consult the FY 2008 application guide and the regulations (7 CFR 1703.102 for definitions, in combination with the portions of the regulation cited in the table) for detailed requirements for the items in the table. Rural Development *strongly* recommends that applicants exclude ineligible items from the grant and match portions of grant application budgets. However, some items ineligible for funding or matching contributions may be vital to the project. Rural Development encourages applicants to document those costs in the application's budget. Please see the FY 2008 application guide for a recommended budget format, and detailed budget compilation instructions. Grants Combination loan-grants Loans Lease or purchase of eligible DLT equipment and facilities Yes, equip. only Yes. Acquire instructional programming Yes Yes. Technical assistance, develop instructional programming, engineering or environmental studies Yes, up to 10% of the grant Yes, up to 10% of the financial assistance. Medical or education equipment or facilities necessary to the project Yes. Vehicles using distance learning or telemedicine technology to deliver services No Yes. Teacher-student links located at the same facility No Yes, if part of a broader DLT network that meets other eligible program purposes. Links between medical professionals located at the same facility No Yes, if part of a broader DLT network that meets other eligible program purposes. Site development or building alteration No Yes, if the activity meets other program purposes. Land of building purchase No Yes, if the activity meets other program purposes. Building Construction No Yes, if the activity meets other program purposes. Acquiring telecommunications transmission facilities No Yes, if other telecommunications carriers will not install in a reasonable time period and at an economically viable cost to the project. Salaries, wages, benefits for medical or educational personnel No. Salaries or administrative expenses of applicant or project No. Recurring project costs or operating expenses No, (equipment & facility leases are not recurring project costs) Yes, for the first two years after approval (equipment & facility leases are not recurring project costs). Equipment to be owned by the LEC or other telecommunications service provider, if the provider is the applicant No Yes. Duplicative distance learning or telemedicine services No. Any project that for its success, depends on additional DLT financial assistance or other financial assistance that is not assured No. Application Preparation Costs No. Other project costs not in regulation No Yes, for the first two years of operation. Cost of facilities providing distance learning broadcasting (amount) No Yes, financial assistance directly proportional to the distance learning portion of use. Reimburse applicants of others for costs incurred prior to USDA RURAL DEVELOPMENT receipt of completed application No. c. *Discounts.* The DLT Program regulation has long stated that manufacturers' and service providers' discounts are not eligible matches. The Agency will not consider as eligible any proposed match from a vendor, manufacturer, or service provider whose products or services will be used in the DLT project as described in the application. In recent years, the Agency has noted a trend of vendors, manufacturers and other service providers offering their own products and services as in-kind matches for a project when their products or services will also be purchased with either grant or cash match funds for that project. Such activity is a discount and is therefore not an eligible match. Similarly, if a vendor, manufacturer or other service provider proposes a cash match (or any in-kind match) when their products or services will be purchased with grant or match funds, such activity is a discount and is not an eligible match. The Agency actively discourages such matching proposals and will adjust budgets as necessary to remove any such matches, which may reduce an application's score or result in the application's ineligibility due to insufficient match. d. For special ratio combination loan-grant applications, the only eligible purpose is for the conversion to electronic medical records systems, or for the extension of an existing electronic medical records system to a new rural location. 2. *Eligible Equipment & Facilities.* Please see 7 CFR 1703.102 for definitions of eligible equipment, eligible facilities and telecommunications transmission facilities as used in the table above. In addition, the FY 2008 application guide supplies a wealth of information and examples of eligible and ineligible items. 3. *Apportioning budget items.* Many DLT applications propose to use items for a blend of specific DLT project purposes and other purposes. Rural Development will now fund such items, if the applicants attribute the proportion (by percentage of use) of the costs of each item to the project's DLT purpose or to other purposes to enable consideration for a grant of the portion of the item that is for DLT usage. See the FY 2008 application guide for detailed information on how to apportion use and apportioning illustrations. V. Application Review Information A. Special Considerations or Preferences 1. American Samoa, Guam, Virgin Islands, and Northern Mariana Islands applications are exempt from the matching requirement up to a match amount of $200,000 (see 48 U.S.C. 1469a; 91 Stat. 1164). 2. 7 CFR 1703.112 directs that Rural Development Telecommunications Borrowers receive expedited consideration of a loan application or advance under the Rural Electrification Act of 1936 (7 U.S.C. 901-950aa, et seq.) if the loan funds in question are to be used in conjunction with a DLT grant, loan, or combination loan-grant (See 7 CFR 1737 for loans and 7 CFR 1744 for advances). B. Criteria 1. Grant application scoring criteria (total possible points: 235). See 7 CFR 1703.125 for the items that will be reviewed during scoring, and 7 CFR 1703.126 for scoring criteria. 2. Grant applications are scored competitively subject to the criteria listed below. a. Need for services proposed in the application, and the benefits that will be derived if the application receives a grant (up to 55 points).
(i)Up to 45 of the 55 possible points under this criterion are available to all applicants. Points are awarded based on the required narrative crafted by the applicant. Rural Development encourages applicants to carefully read the cited portions of the Program regulation and the FY 2008 application guide for full discussions of this criterion.
(ii)Up to 10 of the possible 55 possible points are to recognize economic need not reflected in the project's National School Lunch Program
(NSLP)score, and can be earned only by applications whose overall NSLP eligibility is less than 50%. To be eligible to receive points under this, the application must include an affirmative request for consideration of the possible 10 points, and compelling documentation of reasons why the NSLP eligibility percentage does not represent the economic need of the proposed project beneficiaries. b. Rurality of the proposed service area (up to 45 points). c. Percentage of students eligible for the NSLP in the proposed service area (objectively demonstrates economic need of the area) (up to 35 points). d. Leveraging resources above the required matching level (up to 35 points). Please see paragraph III.B of this Notice for a brief explanation of matching contributions. e. Level of innovation demonstrated by the project (up to 15 points). f. System cost-effectiveness (up to 35 points). g. Project overlap with Empowerment Zone, Enterprise Communities or Champion Communities designations (up to 15 points). C. Grant Review Standards 1. In addition to the scoring criteria that rank applications against each other, the Agency evaluates grant applications for possible awards on the following items, according to 7 CFR 1703.127: a. Financial feasibility. b. Technical considerations. If the application contains flaws that would prevent the successful implementation, operation or sustainability of a project, the Agency will not award a grant. c. Other aspects of proposals that contain inadequacies that would undermine the ability of the project to comply with the policies of the DLT Program. 2. Applications which do not include all items that determine project eligibility and applicant eligibility by the application deadline will be returned as ineligible. Applications that do not include all items necessary for scoring will be scored as is. Please see the FY 2008 application guide for a full discussion of each required item and for samples and illustrations. The Agency will not request missing items that affect the application's score. 3. The FY 2008 grant application guide specifies the format and order of all required items. Applications that are not assembled and tabbed in the order specified. Incorrectly assembled applications will be returned as ineligible. 4. Most DLT grant projects contain numerous project sites. Rural Development requires that site information be consistent throughout an application. Sites must be referred to by the same designation throughout all parts of an application. Rural Development has provided a site worksheet that requests the necessary information, and can be used as a guide by applicants. Rural Development strongly recommends that applicants complete the site worksheet, listing all requested information for each site. Applications without consistent site information will be returned as ineligible. 5. DLT grant applications which have non-fixed end-user sites, such as ambulance and home health care services, are now scored using a simplified scoring method that finds the relative rurality of the applicant's service area. See the FY 2008 application guide for specific guidance on this method of scoring. When an application contains non-fixed sites, it must be scored using the non-fixed site scoring method. D. Selection Process 1. Grants. Applications are ranked by final score, and by application purpose (education or medical). Rural Development selects applications based on those rankings, subject to the availability of funds. Rural Development may allocate grant awards between medical and educational purposes, but is not required to do so. In addition, Rural Development has the authority to limit the number of applications selected in any one state, or for one project, during a fiscal year. See 7 CFR 1703.127. 2. Combination loan-grants and loans a. Combination loan-grant applications and loan applications are evaluated on the basis of technical, financial, economic and other criteria. b. Rural Development evaluates applications' financial feasibility using the following information. Please see paragraph IV.C.2. of this Notice for the items that constitute a completed combination loan-grant or loan application. Also, see 7 CFR part 1703 subpart F for combination loan-grants and 7 CFR part 1703 subpart G for loans:
(1)Applicant's financial ability to complete the project;
(2)Project feasibility;
(3)Applicant's financial information;
(4)Project sustainability;
(5)Ability to repay the loan portion of a combination loan-grant, including revenue sources;
(6)Collateral for which the applicant has perfected a security interest; and
(7)Adequate security for a loan or the loan portion of a combination loan-grant.
(c)The following project and application characteristics are also evaluated:
(1)Services to be provided by the project.
(2)Project cost.
(3)Project design.
(4)Rurality of the proposed service area. Please see paragraph III.B.4. of this Notice for information on determining rurality.
(5)Other characteristics.
(d)Selection process. Based on the review standards listed above and in the DLT Program regulation, THE AGENCY will process successful combination loan-grant and loan applications on a first-in, first-out basis, dependent upon the availability of funds. Please see 7 CFR 1703.135 for combination loan-grant application processing and selection; and 7 CFR 1703.145 for loan application processing and selection. VI. Award Administration Information A. Award Notices Rural Development generally notifies applicants whose projects are selected for awards by faxing an award letter. Rural Development follows the award letter with an agreement that contains all the terms and conditions for the grant, combination loan-grant or loan. Rural Development recognizes that each funded project is unique, and therefore may attach conditions to different projects' award documents. An applicant must execute and return the agreement, accompanied by any additional items required by the agreement, within the number of days of the shown in the selection notice letter. *B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements:* The items listed in Section IV of this notice, and the DLT Program regulation, FY 2008 application guide and accompanying materials implement the appropriate administrative and national policy requirements. C. Reporting 1. *Performance reporting.* All recipients of DLT financial assistance must provide annual performance activity reports to Rural Development until the project is complete and the funds are expended. A final performance report is also required; the final report may serve as the last annual report. The final report must include an evaluation of the success of the project in meeting DLT Program objectives. See 7 CFR 1703.107. 2. *Financial reporting.* All recipients of DLT financial assistance must provide an annual audit, beginning with the first year a portion of the financial assistance is expended. Audits are governed by United States Department of Agriculture audit regulations. Please see 7 CFR 1703.108. 3. *Record keeping and Accounting.* The loan, or grant contract will contain provisions relating to record keeping and accounting requirements. VII. Agency Contacts A. Web site: *http://www.usda.gov/rus/telecom/dlt/dlt.htm.* The DLT Web site maintains up-to-date resources and contact information for DLT programs. B. Phone: 202-720-0413. C. Fax: 202-720-1051. D. E-mail: *dltinfo@usda.gov.* E. Main point of contact: Director, Advanced Services Division, Telecommunications Program, Rural Development Utilities Programs, United States Department of Agriculture. Dated: January 11, 2008. James M. Andrew, Administrator, Rural Utilities Service. [FR Doc. E8-1378 Filed 1-25-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-15-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Rural Utilities Service Announcement of Grant and Loan Application Deadlines and Funding Levels AGENCY: Rural Utilities Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice of funding availability and solicitation of applications. SUMMARY: The Rural Utilities Service, an agency delivering the United States Department of Agriculture's
(USDA)Rural Development Utilities Programs, hereinafter referred to as Rural Development, announces its Revolving Fund Program
(RFP)application window for Fiscal Year
(FY)2008. In addition to announcing the application window, Rural Development announces the available funding and maximum amounts for RFP competitive grants for the fiscal year. The RFP is authorized under the 2002 Farm Bill (the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002), Public Law 107-171. Qualified private non-profit organizations will receive RFP grant funds to establish a lending program for eligible entities. Eligible entities for the revolving loan fund will be the same entities eligible to obtain a loan, loan guarantee, or grant from the Rural Development Utilities Programs Water and Waste Disposal loan and grant programs. DATES: You may submit completed applications for grants on paper or electronically according to the following deadlines: • Paper copies must be postmarked and mailed, shipped, or sent overnight *no later* than March 28, 2008 to be eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. Late or incomplete applications will not be eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. • Electronic copies must be received by March 28, 2008 to be eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. Late or incomplete applications will not be eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. ADDRESSES: You may obtain application guides and materials for the RFP program at the Water and Environmental Programs
(WEP)Web site: *http://www.usda.gov/rus/water/index.htm.* You may also request application guides and materials by contacting Anita O'Brien at
(202)690-3789. Submit completed paper applications for RFP grants to the Rural Development Utilities Programs, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Ave., SW., Room 2233, STOP 1570, Washington, DC 20250-1570. Applications should be marked “Attention: Assistant Administrator, Water and Environmental Programs.” Submit electronic grant applications at *http://www.grants.gov* ( *Grants.gov* ) and follow the instructions you find on that Web site. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anita O'Brien, Loan Specialist, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Rural Development Utilities Programs, Water and Environmental Programs; telephone:
(202)690-3789, fax:
(202)690-0649. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Overview *Federal Agency:* Rural Utilities Service (RUS). *Funding Opportunity Title:* Grant Program to Establish a Fund for Financing Water and Wastewater Projects (Revolving Fund Program (RFP)). *Announcement Type:* Funding Level Announcement, and Solicitation of Applications. *Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
(CFDA)Number:* 10.864. *Dates:* You may submit completed application for a RFP grant no later than March 28, 2008. *Reminder of competitive grant application deadline:* Applications must be mailed, shipped or submitted electronically through *Grants.gov* no later than March 28, 2008 to be eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. Items in Supplementary Information I. *Funding Opportunity:* Brief introduction to the RFP. II. *Award Information:* Available funds, maximum amounts. III. *Eligibility Information:* Who is eligible, what kinds of projects are eligible, what criteria determine basic eligibility. IV. *Application and Submission Information:* Where to get application materials, what constitutes a completed application, how and where to submit applications, deadlines, items that are eligible. V. *Application Review Information:* Considerations and preferences, scoring criteria, review standards, selection information. VI. *Award Administration Information:* Award notice information, award recipient reporting requirements. VII. *Agency Contacts:* Web, phone, fax, e-mail, contact name. I. Funding Opportunity Drinking water systems are basic and vital to both health and economic development. With dependable water facilities, rural communities can attract families and businesses that will invest in the community and improve the quality of life for all residents. Without dependable water facilities, the communities cannot sustain economic development. Rural Development provides financial and technical assistance to help communities bring safe drinking water and sanitary, environmentally sound waste disposal facilities to rural Americans in greatest need. It supports the sound development of rural communities and the growth of our economy without endangering the environment. The Revolving Fund
(RFP)Grant Program has been established to assist communities with water or wastewater systems. Qualified private non-profit organizations will receive RFP grant funds to establish a lending program for eligible entities. Eligible entities for the revolving loan fund will be the same entities eligible to obtain a loan, loan guarantee, or grant from the Water and Waste Disposal loan and grant programs administered by Rural Development. As grant recipients, the non-profit organizations will set up a revolving loan fund to provide loans to finance predevelopment costs of water or wastewater projects, or short-term small capital projects not part of the regular operation and maintenance of current water and wastewater systems. The amount of financing to an eligible entity shall not exceed $100,000.00 and shall be repaid in a term not to exceed 10 years. The rate shall be determined in the approved grant work plan. II. Award Information *Available funds:* Rural Development is making available $496,500 for competitive grants in FY 2008. III. Eligibility Information A. Who is eligible to apply? An applicant is eligible to apply for the RFP grant if it: 1. Is a private, non-profit organization that has tax-exempt status from the United States Internal Revenue Service (IRS); 2. Is legally established and located within one of the following:
(a)A state within the United States;
(b)The District of Columbia;
(c)The Commonwealth of Puerto Rico; or
(d)A United States territory; 3. Has the legal capacity and authority to carry out the grant purpose; 4. Has a proven record of successfully operating a revolving loan fund to rural areas; 5. Has capitalization acceptable to the Agency, and is composed of at least 51 percent of the outstanding interest or membership being citizens of the United States or individuals who reside in the United States after being legally admitted for permanent residence; 6. Has no delinquent debt to the Federal Government or no outstanding judgments to repay a Federal debt; 7. Demonstrates that it possesses the financial, technical, and managerial capability to comply with Federal and State laws and requirements. B. What are the basic eligibility requirements for a project? 1. The following activities are authorized under the RFP statute:
(a)Grant funds must be used to capitalize a revolving fund program for the purpose of providing direct loan financing to Ultimate Recipients for pre-development costs associated with proposed or with existing water and wastewater systems, or,
(b)Short-term costs incurred for equipment replacement, small-scale extension of services, or other small capital projects that are not part of the regular operations and maintenance activities of existing water and wastewater systems. 2. Grant funds may not be used to pay any of the following:
(a)Payment of the Intermediary's administrative costs or expenses, and,
(b)Delinquent debt owed to the Federal Government. IV. Application and Submission Information A. The grant application guide, copies of necessary forms and samples, and the RFP regulation are available from these sources: 1. *The Internet:* *http://www.usda.gov/rus/water/index.htm* or *http://www.grants.gov* . 2. For paper copies of these materials telephone
(202)690-3789. B. You may file an application in either paper or electronic format. 1. Applications submitted by paper:
(a)Send or deliver paper applications by the U.S. Postal Service
(USPS)or courier delivery services to: Assistant Administrator-Water and Environmental Programs, Rural Development Utilities Programs, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., STOP 1548, Room S-5145, Washington, DC 20250-1548.
(b)For paper applications mail or ensure delivery of an original paper application (no stamped, photocopied, or initialed signatures) and two copies by the deadline date. The application and any materials sent with it become Federal records by law and cannot be returned to you. 2. Electronically submitted applications:
(a)For electronic applications you must file through Grants.gov, the official Federal Government Web site at *http://www.grants.gov* . You must be registered with Grants.gov before you can submit a grant application. If you have not used Grants.gov before, you will need to register with the Central Contractor Registry
(CCR)and the Credential Provider. You will need a DUNS number to access or register at any of the services. The registration processes may take several business days to complete. Follow the instructions at Grants.gov for registering and submitting an electronic application. Rural Development may request original signatures on electronically submitted documents later.
(b)The CCR registers your organization, housing your organizational information and allowing Grants.gov to use it to verify your identity. You may register for the CCR by calling the CCR Assistance Center at 1-888-227-2423 or, you may register online at *http://www.ccr.gov* .
(c)The Credential Provider gives you or your representative a username and password, as part of the Federal Government's e-Authentication to ensure a secure transaction. You will need the username and password when you register with Grants.gov or use Grants.gov to submit your application. You must register with the Central Provider through Grants.gov at the following Web address: *https://apply.grants.gov/OrcRegister* .
(d)*DUNS Number:* Whether you file a paper or an electronic application, you will need a Dun and Bradstreet (D&B) Data Universal Numbering System
(DUNS)number. You must provide your DUNS number on the SF-424, “Application for Federal Assistance.” To verify that your organization has a DUNS number or to receive one at no cost, call the dedicated toll-free request line at 1-866-705-5711 or access the Web site at *http://www.dunandbradstreet.com* . The following information is needed when requesting a DUNS number:
(1)Legal Name.
(2)Headquarters name and address of the organization.
(3)Doing business as
(dba)or other name by which the organization is commonly recognized.
(4)Physical address.
(5)Mailing address (if separate from headquarters and/or physical address).
(6)Telephone number.
(7)Contact name and title.
(8)Number of employees at the physical location.
(e)Rural Development will not accept applications by fax or e-mail. C. A complete application must meet the following requirements: 1. To be considered for support, you must be an eligible entity and must submit a complete application by the deadline date. You should consult the cost principles and general administrative requirements for grants pertaining to their organizational type in order to prepare the budget and complete other parts of the application. You also must demonstrate compliance (or intent to comply), through certification or other means, with a number of public policy requirements. 2. Applicants must complete and submit the following forms to apply for a RFP grant:
(a)Standard Form 424, “Application for Federal Assistance.”
(b)Standard Form 424A, “Budget Information—Non-Construction Programs.”
(c)Standard Form 424B, “Assurances—Non-Construction Programs.”
(d)Standard Form LLL, “Disclosure of Lobbying Activity.”
(e)Form RD 400-1, “Equal Opportunity Agreement.”
(f)Form RD 400-4, “Assurance Agreement (Under Title VI, Civil Rights Act of 1964). 3. The project proposal should outline the project in sufficient detail to provide a reader with a complete understanding of how the loan program will work. Explain what you will accomplish by lending funds to eligible entities. Demonstrate the feasibility of the proposed loan program in meeting the objectives of this grant program. The proposal should cover the following elements:
(a)Present a brief project overview. Explain the purpose of the project, how it relates to Rural Development's purposes, how you will carry out the project, what the project will produce, and who will direct it.
(b)Describe why the project is necessary. Demonstrate that eligible entities need loan funds. Quantify the number of prospective borrowers or provide statistical or narrative evidence that a sufficient number of borrowers will exist to justify the grant award. Describe the service area. Address community needs.
(c)Clearly state your project goals. Your objectives should clearly describe the goals and be concrete and specific enough to be quantitative or observable. They should also be feasible and relate to the purpose of the loan program.
(d)The narrative should cover in more detail the items briefly described in the Project Summary. It should establish the basis for any claims that you have substantial expertise in promoting the safe and productive use of revolving funds. In describing what the project will achieve, you should tell the reader if it also will have broader influence. The narrative should address the following points:
(1)Document your ability to administer and service a revolving fund in accordance with the provisions of 7 CFR part 1783.
(2)Document that, to establish the revolving fund, you can commit financial resources your organization controls. This documentation should describe the sources of funds other than the RFP grant that will be used to pay your operational costs and provide financial assistance for projects.
(3)Demonstrate that you have secured commitments of significant financial support from other funding sources, if appropriate.
(4)List the fees and charges that borrowers will be assessed.
(e)The work plan must describe the tasks and activities that will be accomplished with available resources during the grant period. It must show the work you plan to do to achieve the anticipated outcomes, goals, and objectives set out for the RFP. The plan must:
(1)Describe the work to be performed by each person.
(2)Give a schedule or timetable of work to be done.
(3)Show evidence of previous experience with the techniques to be used or their successful use by others.
(4)Outline the loan program to include the following: specific loan purposes, a loan application process; priorities, borrower eligibility criteria, limitations, fees, interest rates, terms, and collateral requirements.
(5)Provide a marketing plan.
(6)Explain the mechanics of how you will transfer loan funds to the borrowers.
(7)Describe follow-up or continuing activities that should occur after project completion such as monitoring and reporting borrowers' accomplishments.
(8)Describe how the results will be evaluated. The evaluation criteria should be in line with the project objectives.
(9)List all personnel responsible for administering this program along with a statement of their qualifications and experience.
(f)The written justification for projected costs should explain how budget figures were determined for each category. It should indicate which costs are to be covered by grant funds and which costs will be met by your organization or other organizations. The justification should account for all expenditures discussed in the narrative. It should reflect appropriate cost-sharing contributions. The budget justification should explain the budget and accounting system proposed or in place. The administrative costs for operating the budget should be expressed as a percentage of the overall budget. The budget justification should provide specific budget figures, rounding off figures to the nearest dollar. Applicants should consult OMB Circular A-122: “Cost Principles for Non-Profit Organizations” for information about appropriate costs for each budget category.
(g)In addition to completing the standard application forms, you must submit: 1. Supplementary material that demonstrate that your organization is legally recognized under state and Federal law. Satisfactory documentation includes, but is not limited to, certificates from the Secretary of State, or copies of state statutes or laws establishing your organization. Letters from the IRS awarding tax-exempt status are not considered adequate evidence. 2. A certified list of directors and officers with their respective terms. 3. Evidence of tax exempt status from the IRS. 4. Debarment and suspension information required in accordance with 7 CFR, part 3017, subpart 3017.335, if it applies. The section heading is “What information must I provide before entering into a covered transaction with the Department of Agriculture?” It is part of the Department of Agriculture's rules on Government-wide Debarment and Suspension. 5. All of your organization's known workplaces by including the actual address of buildings (or parts of buildings) or other sites where work under the award takes place. Workplace identification is required under the drug-free workplace requirements in accordance with 7 CFR, part 3021, subpart 3021.230. The section heading is “How and when must I identify workplaces?” It is part of the Department of Agriculture's rules on Government-wide Requirements for Drug-Free Workplace (Financial Assistance). 6. The most recent audit of your organization. 7. The following financial statements: i. A pro forma balance sheet at start-up and for at least three additional years; Balance sheets, income statements, and cash flow statements for the last three years. ii. If your organization has been formed less than three years, the financial statements should be submitted for the periods from inception to the present. Projected income and cash flow statements for at least three years supported by a list of assumptions showing the basis for the projections. The projected income statement and balance sheet must include one set of projections that shows the revolving loan fund only and a separate set of projections that shows your organization's total operations. 8. Additional information to support and describe your plan for achieving the grant objectives. The information may be regarded as essential for understanding and evaluating the project such as letters of support, resolutions, policies, etc. The supplements may be presented in appendices to the proposal. V. Application Review Information A. Within 30 days of receiving your application, Rural Development will send you a letter of acknowledgment. Your application will be reviewed for completeness to determine if you included all of the items required. If your application is incomplete or ineligible, Rural Development will return it to you with an explanation. B. A review team, composed of at least two members, will evaluate all applications and proposals. They will make overall recommendations based on factors such as eligibility, application completeness, and conformity to application requirements. They will score the applications based on criteria in the next section. C. All applications that are complete and eligible will be ranked competitively based on the following scoring criteria: Scoring criteria Points 1. Degree of expertise and successful experience in making and servicing commercial loans, with a successful record Up to 30 points. 2. Percentage of applicant contributions. Points allowed under this paragraph will be based on written evidence of the availability of funds from sources other than the proceeds of a RFP grant to pay part of the cost of a loan recipient's project. In-kind contributions will not be considered. Funds from other sources as a percentage of the RFP grant and points corresponding to such percentages are as follows: Less than 20 percent Ineligible. At least 20 percent but not more than 49 percent of the total project costs 10 points. At least 50 percent of the total project costs 20 points. 3. Extent to which the work plan clearly articulates a well thought out approach to accomplishing objectives; clearly defines who will be served by the project or program; and includes all components listed in 1783.37(b)(14) Up to 40 points. 4. Description of the service area, particularly the range of the area: State 10 points. Regional 15 points. National 20 points. 5. Extent to which the problem or issue being addressed in the Needs Assessment is defined clearly and supported by data Up to 15 points. 6. Extent to which the goals and objectives are clearly defined, tied to the need as defined in the Needs Assessment, and are measurable Up to 15 points. 7. Extent to which the evaluation methods are specific to the program, clearly defined, measurable, with expected program outcomes Up to 20 points. 8. Administrator's discretion, taking into consideration such factors as: Up to 10 points. Creative outreach ideas for marketing RFP loans; Amount of funds requested in relation to the amount of needs demonstrated in the proposal; Excellent utilization of a previous revolving loan fund; and, Optimizing the use of agency resources. VI. Award Administration Information A. Rural Development will rank all qualifying applications by their final score. Applications will be selected for funding, based on the highest scores and the availability of funding for RFP grants. Each applicant will be notified in writing of the score its application receives. B. In making its decision about your application, Rural Development may determine that your application is: 1. Eligible and selected for funding, 2. Eligible but offered fewer funds than requested, 3. Eligible but not selected for funding, or 4. Ineligible for the grant. C. In accordance with 7 CFR Part 1900, subpart B, you generally have the right to appeal adverse decisions. Some adverse decisions cannot be appealed. For example, if you are denied Rural Development funding due to a lack of funds available for the grant program, this decision cannot be appealed. However, you may make a request to the National Appeals Division
(NAD)to review the accuracy of our finding that the decision cannot be appealed. The appeal must be in writing and filed at the appropriate Regional Office, which can be found at *http://www.nad.usda.gov/offices.htm* or by calling
(703)305-1166. D. Applicants selected for funding will complete a grant agreement, which outlines the terms and conditions of the grant award. E. Grantees will be reimbursed as follows: 1. SF-270, “Request for Advance or Reimbursement,” will be completed by the grantee and submitted to either the State or National Office not more frequently than monthly. 2. Upon receipt of a properly completed SF-270, the funds will be requested through the field office terminal system. Ordinarily, payment will be made within 30 days after receipt of a proper request for reimbursement. 3. Grantees are encouraged to use women- and minority-owned banks (a bank which is owned at least 50 percent by women or minority group members) for the deposit and disbursement of funds. F. Any change in the scope of the project, budget adjustments of more than 10 percent of the total budget, or any other significant change in the project must be reported to and approved by the approval official by written amendment to the grant agreement. Any change not approved may be cause for termination of the grant. G. Grantees shall constantly monitor performance to ensure that time schedules are being met, projected work by time periods is being accomplished, and other performance objectives are being achieved. The Grantee will provide project reports as follows: 1. SF-269, “Financial Status Report (short form),” and a project performance activity report will be required of all grantees on a quarterly basis, due 30 days after the end of each quarter. 2. A final project performance report will be required with the last SF-269 due 90 days after the end of the last quarter in which the project is completed. The final report may serve as the last quarterly report. 3. All multi-State grantees are to submit an original of each report to the National Office. Grantees serving only one State are to submit an original of each report to the State Office. The project performance reports should detail, preferably in a narrative format, activities that have transpired for the specific time period. H. The grantee will provide an audit report or financial statements as follows: 1. Grantees expending $500,000 or more Federal funds per fiscal year will submit an audit conducted in accordance with OMB Circular A-133. The audit will be submitted within 9 months after the grantee's fiscal year. Additional audits may be required if the project period covers more than one fiscal year. 2. Grantees expending less than $500,000 will provide annual financial statements covering the grant period, consisting of the organization's statement of income and expense and balance sheet signed by an appropriate official of the organization. Financial statements will be submitted within 90 days after the grantee's fiscal year. VII. Agency Contacts A. *Web site:* *http://www.usda.gov/rus/water* . The Rural Development Utilities Programs Web site maintains up-to-date resources and contact information for the RFP. B. *Phone:* 202-690-3789. C. *Fax:* 202-690-0649. D. *E-mail:* *anita.obrien@wdc.usda.gov* . E. *Main point of contact:* Anita O'Brien, Loan Specialist, Water and Environmental Programs, Water Programs Division, Rural Development Utilities Programs, U.S. Department of Agriculture. Dated: January 11, 2008. James M. Andrew, Administrator, Rural Utilities Service. [FR Doc. E8-1376 Filed 1-25-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-15-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Rural Utilities Service Announcement of Grant Application Deadlines and Funding Levels AGENCY: Rural Utilities Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice of funds availability and solicitation of applications. SUMMARY: The Rural Utilities Service (RUS), an agency delivering the United States Department of Agriculture's
(USDA)Rural Development Utilities Programs, hereinafter referred to as Rural Development, announces its Community Connect Grant Program application window for Fiscal Year
(FY)2008. In addition, Rural Development announces the minimum and maximum amounts for Community Connect grants applicable for the fiscal year. The Community Connect Grant Program regulations can be found at 7 CFR part 1739, subpart A. DATES: You may submit completed applications for grants on paper or electronically according to the following deadlines: • Paper copies must carry proof of shipping *no later* than March 28, 2008 to be eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. Late applications are not eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. • Electronic copies must be received by March 28, 2008 to be eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. Late applications are not eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. ADDRESSES: You may obtain application guides and materials for the Community Connect Grant Program via the Internet at the following Web site: *http://www.usda.gov/rus/telecom/commconnect.htm* . You may also request application guides and materials from Rural Development by contacting the appropriate individual listed in section VII of the Supplementary Information section of this notice. Submit completed paper applications for grants to the Rural Development Utilities Program, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Ave., SW., Room 2870, STOP 1599, Washington, DC 20250-1599. Applications should be marked “Attention: Director, Broadband Division, Rural Development Utilities Program.” Submit electronic grant applications at *http://www.grants.gov* (Grants.gov), following the instructions you find on that Web site. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kenneth Kuchno, Director, Broadband Division, Rural Development Utilities Program, U.S. Department of Agriculture, telephone:
(202)690-4673, fax:
(202)690-4389. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Overview *Federal Agency:* Rural Utilities Service (RUS). *Funding Opportunity Title:* Community Connect Grant Program. *Announcement Type:* Initial announcement. *Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
(CFDA)Number:* 10.863. *Dates:* You may submit completed applications for grants on paper or electronically according to the following deadlines: • Paper copies must carry proof of shipping no later than March 28, 2008 to be eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. Late applications are not eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. • Electronic copies must be received by March 28, 2008 to be eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. Late applications are not eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. Items in Supplementary Information I. *Funding Opportunity:* Brief introduction to the Community Connect Grant Program. II. *Award Information:* Available funds and minimum and maximum amounts. III. *Eligibility Information:* Who is eligible, what kinds of projects are eligible, what criteria determine basic eligibility. IV. *Application and Submission Information:* Where to get application materials, what constitutes a completed application, how and where to submit applications, deadlines, items that are eligible. V. *Application Review Information:* Considerations and preferences, scoring criteria, review standards, selection information. VI. *Award Administration Information:* Award notice information, award recipient reporting requirements. VII. *Agency Contacts:* Web, phone, fax, e-mail, contact name. I. Funding Opportunity The provision of broadband transmission service is vital to the economic development, education, health, and safety of rural Americans. The purpose of the Community Connect Grant Program is to provide financial assistance in the form of grants to eligible applicants that will provide currently unserved areas, on a “community-oriented connectivity” basis, with broadband transmission service that fosters economic growth and delivers enhanced educational, health care, and public safety services. Rural Development will give priority to rural areas that it believes have the greatest need for broadband transmission services, based on the criteria contained herein. Grant authority will be used for the deployment of broadband transmission service to extremely rural, lower-income communities on a “community-oriented connectivity” basis. The “community-oriented connectivity” concept will stimulate practical, everyday uses and applications of broadband facilities by cultivating the deployment of new broadband transmission services that improve economic development and provide enhanced educational and health care opportunities in rural areas. Such an approach will also give rural communities the opportunity to benefit from the advanced technologies that are necessary to achieve these goals. Please see 7 CFR part 1739, subpart A for specifics. This notice has been formatted to conform to a policy directive issued by the Office of Federal Financial Management
(OFFM)of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), published in the **Federal Register** on June 23, 2003. This Notice does not change the Community Connect Grant Program regulation (7 CFR 1739, subpart A). II. Award Information A. Available Funds 1. *General.* The Administrator has determined that the following amounts are available for grants in FY 2008 under 7 CFR 1739.2(a). 2. *Grants.* a. $13,405,500 is available for grants. Under 7 CFR 1739.2, the Administrator has established a minimum grant amount of $50,000 and a maximum grant amount of $1,000,000 for FY 2008. b. *Assistance instrument:* Rural Development will execute grant documents appropriate to the project prior to any advance of funds with successful applicants. B. Community Connect grants cannot be renewed. Award documents specify the term of each award. Applications to extend existing projects are welcomed (grant applications must be submitted during the application window) and will be evaluated as new applications. III. Eligibility Information A. Who is eligible for grants? (See 7 CFR 1739.10.) 1. Only entities legally organized as one of the following are eligible for Community Connect Grant Program financial assistance: a. An incorporated organization, b. An Indian tribe or tribal organization, as defined in 25 U.S.C. 450b(b) and (c), c. A state or local unit of government, d. A cooperative, private corporation or limited liability company organized on a for-profit or not-for-profit basis. 2. Individuals are not eligible for Community Connect Grant Program financial assistance directly. 3. Applicants must have the legal capacity and authority to own and operate the broadband facilities as proposed in its application, to enter into contracts and to otherwise comply with applicable federal statutes and regulations. B. What are the basic eligibility requirements for a project? 1. Required matching contributions. Please see 7 CFR 1739.14 for the requirement. Grant applicants must demonstrate a matching contribution, in cash or in kind (new, non-depreciated items), of at least fifteen
(15)percent of the total amount of financial assistance requested. Matching contributions must be used for eligible purposes of Community Connect grant assistance (see 7 CFR 1739.12). 2. To be eligible for a grant, the Project must (see 7 CFR 1739.11): a. Serve a Rural Area where Broadband Transmission Service does not currently exist, to be verified by Rural Development prior to the award of the grant; b. Serve one Community recognized in the latest U.S. Census or the latest version of the Rand McNally Atlas; c. Deploy Basic Broadband Transmission Service, free of all charges for at least 2 years, to all Critical Community Facilities located within the proposed Service Area; d. Offer Basic Broadband Transmission Service to residential and business customers within the proposed Service Area; and e. Provide a Community Center with at least ten
(10)Computer Access Points within the proposed Service Area, and make Broadband Transmission Service available therein, free of all charges to users for at least 2 years. C. See paragraph IV.B of this notice for a discussion of the items that make up a completed application. You may also refer to 7 CFR 1739.15 for completed grant application items. IV. Application and Submission Information A. Clarifications to Requirements for FY 2008 1. Rural Development clarifies that the definition of “Critical Community Facilities” includes the mandatory Community Center. 2. For all funding commitments, including all matching fund commitments and commitments made by the applicant, that are required to complete the Project in addition to the Rural Development grant, evidence must be submitted demonstrating that funding arrangements have been obtained. If the appropriate funding commitments are not included in the application, the application will be deemed ineligible for consideration. This evidence must: a. Clearly state the name of the entity that is making the commitment; b. The amount of the commitment; and c. The purpose of commitment. 3. Rural Development clarifies that in order to qualify as eligible costs for grant coverage or matching fund contributions, operating expenses incurred in providing Broadband Transmission Service to Critical Community Facilities for the first 2 years of operation and in providing training and instruction must be for the following purposes subject to the specified maximum amounts: a. Salary for operations manager, not to exceed $30,000 per year. b. Salary for technical support staff, not to exceed $30,000 per year. c. Salary for community center staff, not to exceed $25,000 per year. d. Bandwidth expenses, not to exceed $25,000 per year. e. Training courses on the use of the Internet, not to exceed $15,000 per year. The operating costs to be funded by the grant or used as matching contributions cannot exceed in the aggregate $250,000. No other operating expenses are eligible for grant funding or to be considered as matching funds. 4. Community means any incorporated or unincorporated town, village, or borough recognized in the latest decennial census as published by the Bureau of the Census or in the most recent edition of a Rand McNally Atlas that is located in a Rural Area. 5. Rural Development clarifies that the economic need of the applicant's service territory will be based on the median household income
(MHI)for the Community serviced and the state in which the Community is located, as determined by the U.S. Bureau of the Census at *http://factfinder.census.gov* . If the community was qualified using the Rand McNally Atlas, the applicant must use the MHI, contained in the latest decennial census, of the county in which the Community resides as the Community MHI. The economic need will no longer be based on the Per Capita Personal Income of the community. B. *Where to get application information.* The application guide, copies of necessary forms and samples, and the Community Connect Grant Program regulation are available from these sources: 1. The Internet: *http://www.usda.gov/rus/telecom/commconnect.htm,* or *http://www.grants.gov* . 2. The Rural Development Broadband Division, for paper copies of these materials:
(202)690-4673. B. What constitutes a completed application? 1. Detailed information on each item required can be found in the Community Connect Grant Program regulation and the Community Connect Grant Program application guide. Applicants are strongly encouraged to read and apply both the regulation and the application guide. This Notice does not change the requirements for a completed application for any form of Community Connect Grant Program financial assistance specified in the Community Connect Grant Program regulation. The Community Connect Grant Program regulation and the application guide provide specific guidance on each of the items listed and the Community Connect Grant Program application guide provides all necessary forms and sample worksheets. 2. Applications should be prepared in conformance with the provisions in 7 CFR part 1739, subpart A, and applicable USDA regulations including 7 CFR parts 3015, 3016, and 3019. Applicants must use the Rural Development Application Guide for this program containing instructions and all necessary forms, as well as other important information, in preparing their application. Completed applications must include the following: a. *An Application for Federal Assistance.* A completed Standard Form
(SF)424. b. *An executive summary of the Project.* The applicant must provide Rural Development with a general project overview. c. *Scoring criteria documentation.* Each grant applicant must address and provide documentation on how it meets each of the scoring criteria detailed 7 CFR 1739.17. d. *System design.* The applicant must submit a system design, including, narrative specifics of the proposal, associated costs, maps, engineering design studies, technical specifications and system capabilities, etc. e. *Scope of work.* The scope of work must include specific activities and services to be performed under the proposal, who will carry out the activities and services, specific time-frames for completion, and a budget for all capital and administrative expenditures reflecting the line item costs for all grant purposes, the matching contribution, and other sources of funds necessary to complete the project. f. *Community-Oriented Connectivity Plan.* The applicant must provide a detailed Community-Oriented Connectivity Plan. g. *Financial information and sustainability.* The applicant must provide financial statements and information and a narrative description demonstrating the sustainability of the Project. h. *A statement of experience.* The applicant must provide a written narrative describing its demonstrated capability and experience, if any, in operating a broadband telecommunications system. i. *Evidence of legal authority and existence.* The applicant must provide evidence of its legal existence and authority to enter into a grant agreement with RUS and to perform the activities proposed under the grant application. j. *Funding commitment from other sources.* If the Project requires additional funding from other sources in addition to the Rural Development grant, the applicant must provide evidence that funding agreements have been obtained to ensure completion of the Project. k. *Compliance with other federal statutes.* The applicant must provide evidence of compliance with other federal statutes and regulations, including, but not limited to the following:
(i)7 CFR part 15, subpart A—Nondiscrimination in Federally Assisted Programs of the Department of Agriculture—Effectuation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
(ii)7 CFR part 3015—Uniform Federal Assistance Regulations.
(iii)7 CFR part 3017—Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Non-procurement).
(iv)7 CFR part 3018—New Restrictions on Lobbying.
(v)7 CFR part 3021—Governmentwide Requirements for Drug-Free Workplace (Financial Assistance).
(vi)Certification regarding Architectural Barriers.
(vii)Certification regarding Flood Hazard Precautions.
(viii)An environmental report, in accordance with 7 CFR part 1794.
(ix)Certification that grant funds will not be used to duplicate lines, facilities, or systems providing Broadband Transmission Service.
(x)Federal Obligation Certification on Delinquent Debt. 3. DUNS Number. As required by the OMB, all applicants for grants must now supply a Dun and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System
(DUNS)number when applying. The SF-424 contains a field for you to use when supplying your DUNS number. Obtaining a DUNS number costs nothing and requires a short telephone call to Dun and Bradstreet. Please see the Community Connect Web site or Grants.gov for more information on how to obtain a DUNS number or how to verify your organization's number. C. How many copies of an application are required? 1. *Applications submitted on paper:* Submit the original application and two
(2)copies to Rural Development. 2. *Electronically submitted applications:* The additional paper copies are not necessary if you submit the application electronically through *Grants.gov* . D. How and Where to Submit an Application Grant applications may be submitted on paper or electronically. 1. Submitting applications on paper. a. Address paper applications for grants to the Rural Development, Utilities Program, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Ave., SW., Room 2868, STOP 1599, Washington, DC 20250-1599. Applications should be marked “Attention: Director, Broadband Division, Rural Development Utilities Program.” b. Paper applications must show proof of mailing or shipping consisting of one of the following:
(i)A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service
(USPS)postmark;
(ii)A legible mail receipt with the date of mailing stamped by the USPS; or
(iii)A dated shipping label, invoice, or receipt from a commercial carrier. c. Due to screening procedures at the Department of Agriculture, packages arriving via the USPS are irradiated, which can damage the contents. Rural Development encourages applicants to consider the impact of this procedure in selecting their application delivery method. 2. Electronically submitted applications. a. Applications will not be accepted via facsimile machine transmission or electronic mail. b. Electronic applications for grants will be accepted if submitted through the Federal government's *Grants.gov* initiative at *http://www.grants.gov* . c. How to use *Grants.gov* :
(i)Navigate your Web browser to *http://www.grants.gov.*
(ii)Follow the instructions on that Web site to find grant information.
(iii)Download a copy of the application package.
(iv)Complete the package off-line.
(v)Upload and submit the application via the *Grants.gov* Web site. d. *Grants.gov* contains full instructions on all required passwords, credentialing and software. e. Rural Development encourages applicants who wish to apply through *Grants.gov* to submit their applications in advance of the deadline. f. If a system problem occurs or you have technical difficulties with an electronic application, please use the customer support resources available at the *Grants.gov* Web site. E. Deadlines 1. Paper applications must be postmarked and mailed, shipped, or sent overnight no later than March 28, 2008 to be eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. Late applications are not eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. 2. Electronic grant applications must be received by March 28, 2008 to be eligible for FY 2008 funding. Late applications are not eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. F. Funding Restrictions 1. *Eligible grant purposes.* Grant funds may be used to finance: a. The construction, acquisition, or leasing of facilities, including spectrum, to deploy Broadband Transmission Service to all participating Critical Community Facilities and all required facilities needed to offer such service to residential and business customers located within the proposed Service Area; b. The improvement, expansion, construction, or acquisition of a Community Center that furnishes free access to broadband Internet service, provided that the Community Center is open and accessible to area residents before, during, and after normal working hours and on Saturday or Sunday. Grant funds provided for such costs shall not exceed the greater of five percent (5%) of the grant amount requested or $100,000; c. End-User Equipment needed to carry out the Project; d. Operating expenses incurred in providing Broadband Transmission Service to Critical Community Facilities for the first 2 years of operation and in providing training and instruction; and e. The purchase of land, buildings, or building construction needed to carry out the Project. 2. *Ineligible grant purposes.* a. Grant funds may not be used to finance the duplication of any existing Broadband Transmission Service provided by another entity. b. Facilities financed with grant funds cannot be utilized, in any way, to provide local exchange telecommunications service to any person or entity already receiving such service. 3. Please see 7 CFR 1739.3 for definitions, 7 CFR 1739.12 for eligible grant purposes, and 7 CFR 1739.13 for ineligible grant purposes. V. Application Review Information A. Criteria 1. Grant applications are scored competitively and subject to the criteria listed below. 2. Grant application scoring criteria (total possible points: 100) See 7 CFR 1739.17 for the items that will be reviewed during scoring and for scoring criteria. a. The rurality of the Project (up to 40 points); b. The economic need of the Project's Service Area (up to 30 points); and c. The “community-oriented connectivity” benefits derived from the proposed service (up to 30 points). B. Review Standards 1. All applications for grants must be delivered to Rural Development at the address and by the date specified in this notice (see also 7 CFR 1739.2) to be eligible for funding. Rural Development will review each application for conformance with the provisions of this part. Rural Development may contact the applicant for additional information or clarification. 2. Incomplete applications as of the deadline for submission will not be considered. If an application is determined to be incomplete, the applicant will be notified in writing and the application will be returned with no further action. 3. Applications conforming with this part will then be evaluated competitively by a panel of Rural Development employees selected by the Administrator of Rural Development Utilities Program, and will be awarded points as described in the scoring criteria in 7 CFR 1739.17. Applications will be ranked and grants awarded in rank order until all grant funds are expended. 4. Regardless of the score an application receives, if Rural Development determines that the Project is technically or financially infeasible, Rural Development will notify the applicant, in writing, and the application will be returned with no further action. C. Selection Process Grant applications are ranked by final score. Rural Development selects applications based on those rankings, subject to the availability of funds. VI. Award Administration Information A. Award Notices Rural Development recognizes that each funded project is unique, and therefore may attach conditions to different projects' award documents. Rural Development generally notifies applicants whose projects are selected for awards by faxing an award letter. Rural Development follows the award letter with a grant agreement that contains all the terms and conditions for the grant. An applicant must execute and return the grant agreement, accompanied by any additional items required by the grant agreement. B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements The items listed in paragraph IV.B.2.k of this notice, and the Community Connect Grant Program regulation, application guide and accompanying materials implement the appropriate administrative and national policy requirements. C. Reporting 1. *Performance reporting.* All recipients of Community Connect Grant Program financial assistance must provide annual performance activity reports to Rural Development until the project is complete and the funds are expended. A final performance report is also required; the final report may serve as the last annual report. The final report must include an evaluation of the success of the project. See 7 CFR 1739.19. 2. *Financial reporting.* All recipients of Community Connect Grant Program financial assistance must provide an annual audit, beginning with the first year a portion of the financial assistance is expended. Audits are governed by United States Department of Agriculture audit regulations. Please see 7 CFR 1739.20. VII. Agency Contacts A. *Web site:* *http://www.usda.gov/rus/commconnect.htm* . This Web site maintains up-to-date resources and contact information for the Community Connect Grant Program. *B. Phone:* 202-690-4673. *C. Fax:* 202-690-4389. D. *Main point of contact:* Kenneth Kuchno, Director, Broadband Division, Rural Development Utilities Program, U.S. Department of Agriculture. Dated: January 11, 2008. James M. Andrew, Administrator, Rural Utilities Service. [FR Doc. E8-1375 Filed 1-25-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-15-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Rural Utilities Service Announcement of Grant Application Deadlines and Funding Levels AGENCY: Rural Utilities Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice of funding availability. SUMMARY: The Rural Utilities Service, an agency delivering the United States Department of Agriculture's
(USDA)Rural Development Utilities Programs, hereinafter referred to as Rural Development and/or Agency, announces its Public Television Digital Transition Grant Program application window for Fiscal Year
(FY)2008. In addition to announcing the application window, Rural Development announces the available funding and maximum amounts for the Public Television Station Digital Transition Grant Program competitive grants for the fiscal year. The Public Television Digital Transition Grant Program is authorized through the Distance Learning and Telemedicine Grant Program. Funds from the Public Television Digital Transition Grant Program are awarded to public television stations which are a noncommercial educational television broadcast station that qualify for Community Service Grants by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting under section 396(k) of the Communications Act of 1934. These grants enable public television stations in rural areas to replace current analog television broadcasting equipment with digital television broadcasting equipment as part of the national transition to digital television service. DATES: You may submit completed applications for grants on paper or electronically according to the following deadlines: • Paper copies must carry proof of shipping *no later* than March 28, 2008 to be eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. Late applications are not eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. • Electronic copies must be received by March 28, 2008 to be eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. Late applications are not eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. ADDRESSES: You may obtain the application guide and materials for the Public Television Station Digital Transition Grant Program via the Internet at the following Web site: *http://www.usda.gov/rus/telecom/.* You may also request the application guide and materials from the Agency by contacting the appropriate individual listed in section VII of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this notice. • Submit completed paper applications for grants to the United States Department of Agriculture, Rural Development Utilities Programs, Telecommunications Program, 1400 Independence Ave., SW., Room 2844, STOP 1550, Washington, DC 20250-1550. Applications should be marked “Attention: Gary B. Allan, Chief, Universal Services Branch, Advanced Services Division.” • Submit electronic grant applications to Grants.gov at the following Web address: *http://www.grants.gov/* (Grants.gov), and follow the instructions you find on that Web site. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary B. Allan, Chief, Universal Services Branch, Advanced Services Division, United States Department of Agriculture Rural Development Utilities Programs, Telecommunications Program, telephone:
(202)690-4493, fax:
(202)720-1051. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Overview *Federal Agency:* Rural Utilities Service (RUS). *Funding Opportunity Title:* Public Television Station Digital Transition Grant Program. *Announcement Type:* Initial announcement. Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
(CFDA)Number: 10.861. *Dates:* You may submit completed applications for grants on paper or electronically according to the following deadlines: • Paper copies must carry proof of shipping no later than March 28, 2008, to be eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. Late applications are not eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. • Electronic copies must be received by March 28, 2008, to be eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. Late applications are not eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. *Items in Supplementary Information:* *I. Funding Opportunity:* Brief introduction to the Public Television Station Digital Transition Grant Program. *II. Award Information:* Available funds and maximum amounts. *III. Eligibility Information:* Who is eligible, what kinds of projects are eligible, what criteria determine basic eligibility. *IV. Application and Submission Information:* Where to get application materials, what constitutes a completed application, how and where to submit applications, deadlines, items that are eligible. *V. Application Review Information:* Considerations and preferences, scoring criteria, review standards, selection information. *VI. Award Administration Information:* Award notice information, award recipient reporting requirements. *VII. Agency Contacts:* Web, phone, fax, e-mail, contact name. I. Funding Opportunity As part of the nation's transition to digital television, the Federal Communications Commission
(FCC)requires all television broadcasters to begin broadcasting using digital signals, and to cease analog broadcasting, by February 17, 2009. This exciting step forward in broadcast television will bring more lifelike picture and sound, and more viewing choice, into urban and suburban homes across America. For rural households the digital transition could bring the end of over-the-air public television service. These rural households are the focus of the Rural Development Public Television Station Digital Transition Grant Program. Most applications to the Public Television Station Digital Transition Grant Program have sought assistance towards the goal of digitally replicating analog coverage areas through transmitter and translator transitions. The first priority has been to initiate digital broadcasting from their main transmitters. As many stations have transitioned their transmitters, the focus has shifted to power upgrades and translators, as well as digital program production equipment and multicasting and datacasting equipment. In FY 2007 awards were made for a transmitter transition, transmitter power maximization, translators, master control equipment, and production equipment. When compared to previous years, as the digital transition progresses, more applications were received for translators and master control and production equipment, than for transmitters. Some stations may not achieve full analog parity in program management and creation until after the February 2009 deadline. Some public television stations produce the only local news and sports programming available in their markets. The continuation of such services are especially important to rural communities. It is also important for public television stations to be able to tailor their programs and services (e.g., education services, public health, homeland security, and local culture) to the needs of their rural constituents. If public television programming is lost, many school systems may be left without educational programming they count on for curriculum compliance. This notice has been formatted to conform to a policy directive issued by the Office of Federal Financial Management
(OFFM)of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), published in the **Federal Register** on June 23, 2003, (68 FR 37370). This Notice does not change the Public Television Station Digital Transition Grant Program regulation (7 CFR 1740). II. Award Information A. Available Funds 1. *General.* The Administrator has determined that the following amounts are available for grants in FY 2008 under 7 CFR 1740.1. 2. *Grants* . a. $4,965,000 is available for grants from FY 2008. Under 7 CFR 1740.2, the maximum amount for grants under this program is $750,000 per public television station. b. Assistance instrument: Grant documents appropriate to the project will be executed with successful applicants prior to any advance of funds. B. Public Television Station Digital Transition grants cannot be renewed. Award documents specify the term of each award, and due to uncertainties in regulatory approvals of digital television broadcast facilities, the Agency will extend the period during which grant funding is available upon request. III. Eligibility Information A. Who is eligible for grants? (See 7 CFR 1740.3.) 1. Public television stations which serve rural areas are eligible for Public Television Station Digital Transition Grants. A public television station is a noncommercial educational television broadcast station that is qualified for Community Service Grants by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting under section 396(k) of the Communications Act of 1934. 2. Individuals are not eligible for Public Television Station Digital Transition Grant Program financial assistance directly. B. What are the basic eligibility requirements for a project? 1. Grants shall be made to perform digital transitions of television broadcasting serving rural areas. Grant funds may be used to acquire, lease, and/or install facilities and software necessary to the digital transition. Specific purposes include: a. Digital transmitters, translators, and repeaters, including all facilities required to initiate DTV broadcasting. All broadcast facilities acquired with grant funds shall be capable of delivering DTV programming and HDTV programming, at both the interim and final channel and power authorizations. There is no limit to the number of transmitters or translators that may be included in an application; b. Power upgrades of existing DTV transmitter equipment, including replacement of existing low-power digital transmitters with digital transmitters capable of delivering the final authorized power level; c. Studio-to-transmitter links; d. Equipment to allow local control over digital content and programming, including master control equipment; e. Digital program production equipment, including cameras, editing, mixing and storage equipment; f. Multicasting and datacasting equipment; g. Cost of the lease of facilities, if any, for up to three years; and, h. Associated engineering and environmental studies necessary to implementation. 2. Matching contributions: There is no requirement for matching funds in this program (see 7 CFR 1740.5). 3. To be eligible for a grant, the Project must not (see 7 CFR 1740.7): a. Include funding for ongoing operations or for facilities that will not be owned by the applicant, except for leased facilities as provided above; b. Include costs of salaries, wages, and employee benefits of public television station personnel unless they are for construction or installation of eligible facilities; c. Have been funded by any other source; d. Include items bought or built prior to the application deadline specified in this Notice of Funds Availability. C. See paragraph IV.B of this Notice for a discussion of the items that make up a completed application. You may also refer to 7 CFR 1740.9 for completed grant application items. IV. Application and Submission Information A. Where to Get Application Information The application guide, copies of necessary forms and samples, and the Public Television Station Digital Transition Grant Program regulation are available from these sources: 1. The Internet: *http://www.usda.gov/rus/telecom/,* or *http://www.grants.gov.* 2. The USDA Rural Development Advanced Services Division, for paper copies of these materials:
(202)690-4493. B. What constitutes a completed application? 1. Detailed information on each item required can be found in the Public Television Station Digital Transition Grant Program regulation and application guide. Applicants are strongly encouraged to read and apply both the regulation and the application guide. This Notice does not change the requirements for a completed application specified in the program regulation. The program regulation and application guide provide specific guidance on each of the items listed and the application guide provides all necessary forms and sample worksheets. 2. A completed application must include the following documentation, studies, reports and information in form satisfactory to USDA Rural Development. Applications should be prepared in conformance with the provisions in 7 CFR 1740, subpart A, and applicable USDA regulations including 7 CFR parts 3015, 3016, and 3019. Applicants must use the application guide for this program containing instructions and all necessary forms, as well as other important information, in preparing their application. Completed applications must include the following: a. An application for federal assistance, Standard Form 424. b. An executive summary, not to exceed two pages, describing the public television station, its service area and offerings, its current digital transition status, and the proposed project. c. Evidence of the applicant's eligibility to apply under this Notice, proving that the applicant is a Public Television Station as defined in this Notice, and that it is required by the FCC to perform the digital transition. d. A spreadsheet showing the total project cost, with a breakdown of items sufficient to enable USDA Rural Development to determine individual item eligibility. e. A coverage contour map showing the digital television coverage area of the application project. This map must show the counties (or county) comprising the Core Coverage Area by shading and by name. Partial counties included in the applicant's Core Coverage Area must be identified as partial and must contain an attachment with the applicant's estimate of the percentage that its coverage contour comprises of the total area of the county (total area is available from American Factfinder, referenced above). If the application is for a translator, the coverage area may be estimated by the applicant through computer modeling or some other reasonable method, and this estimate is subject to acceptance by USDA Rural Development. f. The applicant's own calculation of its Rurality score, supported by a worksheet showing the population of its Core Coverage Area, and the urban and rural populations within the Core Coverage Area. The data source for the urban and rural components of that population must be identified. If the application includes computations made by a consultant or other organization outside the public television station, the application shall state the details of that collaboration. g. The applicant's own calculation of its Economic Need score, supported by a worksheet showing the National School Lunch Program eligibility levels for all school districts within the Core Coverage Area and averaging these eligibility percentages. The application must include a statement from the state or local organization that administers the NSLP program certifying the school district scores used in the computations. h. If applicable, a presentation not to exceed five pages demonstrating the Critical Need for the project, as outlined in 7 FR 1740.8(e). i. Evidence that the FCC has authorized the initiation of digital broadcasting at the project sites. In the event that an FCC construction permit has not been issued for one or more sites, USDA Rural Development may include those sites in the grant, and make advance of funds for that site conditional upon the submission of a construction permit. j. Compliance with other Federal statutes. The applicant must provide evidence or certification that it is in compliance with all applicable Federal statutes and regulations, including, but not limited to the following:
(1)Executive Order (E.O.) 11246, Equal Employment Opportunity, as amended by E.O. 11375 and as supplemented by regulations contained in 41 CFR part 60;
(2)Architectural barriers;
(3)Flood hazard area precautions;
(4)7 CFR part 3015—Uniform Federal Assistance Regulations.
(5)Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970;
(6)Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1998 (41 U.S.C. 701);
(7)E.O.s 12549 and 12689, Debarment and Suspension; and
(8)Byrd Anti-Lobbying Amendment (31 U.S.C. 1352). k. Environmental impact and historic preservation. The applicant must provide details of the digital transition's impact on the environment and historic preservation, and comply with 7 CFR Part 1794, which contains the Agency's policies and procedures for implementing a variety of federal statutes, regulations, and executive orders generally pertaining to the protection of the quality of the human environment. This must be contained in a separate section entitled “Environmental Impact of the Digital Transition,” and must include the Environmental Questionnaire/Certification, available from USDA Rural Development, describing the impact of its digital transition. Submission of the Environmental Questionnaire/Certification alone does not constitute compliance with 7 CFR part 1794. 3. DUNS Number. As required by the OMB, all applicants for grants must now supply a Dun and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System
(DUNS)number when applying. The Standard Form 424 (SF-424) contains a field for you to use when supplying your DUNS number. Obtaining a DUNS number costs nothing and requires a short telephone call to Dun and Bradstreet. Please see the Public Television Station Digital Transmitter Grant Program Web site or Grants.gov for more information on how to obtain a DUNS number or how to verify your organization's number. C. How many copies of an application are required? 1. *Applications submitted on paper:* Submit the original application and two
(2)copies to USDA Rural Development. 2. *Electronically submitted applications:* The additional paper copies for USDA Rural Development are not necessary if you submit the application electronically through Grants.gov. D. How and where to submit an application. Grant applications may be submitted on paper or electronically. 1. Submitting applications on paper. a. Address paper applications for grants to the Rural Development Utilities Programs, Telecommunications Program, United States Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Ave., SW., Room 2844, STOP 1550, Washington, DC 20250-1550. Applications should be marked “Attention: Gary B. Allan, Chief, Universal Services Branch, Advanced Services Division.” b. Paper applications must show proof of mailing or shipping consisting of one of the following:
(i)A legibly dated postmark applied by the U.S. Postal Service;
(ii)A legible mail receipt with the date of mailing stamped by the USPS; or
(iii)A dated shipping label, invoice, or receipt from a commercial carrier. c. Non-USPS-applied postage dating, i.e. dated postage meter stamps, do not constitute proof of the date of mailing. d. Due to screening procedures at the Department of Agriculture, packages arriving via the USPS are irradiated, which can damage the contents. Rural Development encourages applicants to consider the impact of this procedure in selecting their application delivery method. 2. Electronically submitted applications. a. Applications will not be accepted via facsimile machine transmission or electronic mail. b. Electronic applications for grants will be accepted if submitted through the Federal government's *Grants.gov* initiative at *http://www.grants.gov.* c. How to use *Grants.gov* :
(i)Navigate your Web browser to *http://www.grants.gov.*
(ii)Follow the instructions on that Web site to find grant information.
(iii)Download a copy of the application package.
(iv)Complete the package off-line.
(v)Upload and submit the application via the *Grants.gov* Web site. d. *Grants.gov* contains full instructions on all required passwords, credentialing and software. e. Rural Development encourages applicants who wish to apply through *Grants.gov* to submit their applications in advance of the deadline. Difficulties encountered by applicants filing through *Grants.gov* will not justify filing deadline extensions. f. If a system problem occurs or you have technical difficulties with an electronic application, please use the customer support resources available at the *Grants.gov* Web site. E. Deadlines 1. Paper applications must be postmarked and mailed, shipped, or sent overnight no later than March 28, 2008 to be eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. Late applications are not eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. 2. Electronic grant applications must be received by March 28, 2008 to be eligible for FY 2008 funding. Late applications are not eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. V. Application Review Information A. Criteria 1. Grant applications are scored competitively and subject to the criteria listed below. 2. Grant application scoring criteria are detailed in 7 CFR 1740.8. There are 100 points available, broken down as follows: a. The Rurality of the Project (up to 50 points); b. The Economic Need of the Project's Service Area (up to 25 points); and c. The Critical Need for the project, and of the applicant, including the benefits derived from the proposed service (up to 25 points). B. Review Standards 1. All applications for grants must be delivered to Rural Development at the address and by the date specified in this notice to be eligible for funding. Rural Development will review each application for conformance with the provisions of this part. Rural Development may contact the applicant for additional information or clarification. 2. Incomplete applications as of the deadline for submission will not be considered. If an application is determined to be incomplete, the applicant will be notified in writing and the application will be returned with no further action. 3. Applications conforming with this part will be evaluated competitively by a panel of Rural Development employees selected by the Administrator of RUS, and will be awarded points as described in the scoring criteria in 7 CFR 1740.8. Applications will be ranked and grants awarded in rank order until all grant funds are expended. 4. Regardless of the score an application receives, if Rural Development determines that the Project is technically or financially infeasible, Rural Development will notify the applicant, in writing, and the application will be returned with no further action. C. Scoring Guidelines 1. The applicant's self scores in Rurality and Economic Need will be checked and, if necessary, corrected by Rural Development. 2. The Critical Need score will be determined by Rural Development based on information presented in the application. This score is intended to capture from the rural public's standpoint the necessity and usefulness of the proposed project. This scoring category will also recognize that some transition purchases are more essential than others, so that first time transmitter transitions and power upgrades of previously installed transmitters will receive scoring advantages. Master control equipment is very important to a station's operation and first time master control equipment will also get a high priority. Local production equipment can be a high priority especially if it produces an area's only local news or if the station has been historically active in producing local programming. Translators always deliver a great deal of rural benefit and a full digital conversion of a translators will receive recognition in the project's critical need score. VI. Award Administration Information A. Award Notices Rural Development recognizes that each funded project is unique, and therefore may attach conditions to different projects' award documents. The Agency generally notifies applicants whose projects are selected for awards by faxing an award letter. Rural Development follows the award letter with a grant agreement that contains all the terms and conditions for the grant. An applicant must execute and return the grant agreement, accompanied by any additional items required by the grant agreement. B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements The items listed in the program regulation at 7 CFR 1740.9(j) implement the appropriate administrative and national policy requirements. C. Performance Reporting All recipients of Public Television Station Digital Transition Grant Program financial assistance must provide annual performance activity reports to USDA Rural Development until the project is complete and the funds are expended. A final performance report is also required; the final report may serve as the last annual report. The final report must include an evaluation of the success of the project. VII. Agency Contacts A. *Web site: http://www.usda.gov/rus/.* The Web site maintains up-to-date resources and contact information for the Public Television Station Digital Transition Grant Program. *B. Phone:* 202-690-4493. *C. Fax:* 202-720-1051. D. *Main point of contact:* Gary B. Allan, Chief, Universal Services Branch, Advanced Services Division, Telecommunications Program, USDA Rural Development. Dated: January 11, 2008. James M. Andrew, Administrator, Rural Utilities Service. [FR Doc. E8-1377 Filed 1-25-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-15-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Rural Utilities Service Household Water Well System Grant Program Announcement of Application Deadlines and Funding AGENCY: Rural Utilities Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice of funding availability and solicitation of applications. SUMMARY: The Rural Utilities Service, an agency delivering the United States Department of Agriculture's
(USDA)Rural Development Utilities Programs, hereinafter referred to as Rural Development, announces its Household Water Well System
(HWWS)Grant Program application window for Fiscal Year
(FY)2008. In addition to announcing the application window, Rural Development announces the available funding and maximum amounts for HWWS competitive grants for the fiscal year. The HWWS Grant Program is authorized under Section 6012 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (the Act), Public Law 107-171. The Act authorizes Rural Development to make grants to qualified private non-profit organizations to establish lending programs for household water wells. For FY 2008, the HWWS grant funding available is $993,000. Non-profit organizations will use the grants to make loans to individual homeowners to construct or upgrade a household water well system for an existing home. The organizations must contribute an amount equal to at least 10 percent of the grant request to capitalize the loan fund. Applications may be submitted in paper or electronic format. The HWWS Grant Program regulations are contained in 7 CFR part 1776. DATES: You may submit completed applications for grants on paper or electronically according to the following deadlines: • The deadline for completed applications for a HWWS grant is May 31, 2008. • Paper copies must be postmarked and mailed, shipped, or sent overnight *no later* than May 31, 2008 to be eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. Late or incomplete applications will not be eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. • Applications in electronic copies must be postmarked or time-stamped electronically and must be received by May 31, 2008 to be eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. Late or incomplete applications will not be eligible for FY 2008 grant funding. ADDRESSES: You may obtain application guides and materials for the HWWS program at the Water and Environmental Programs
(WEP)Web site: *http://www.usda.gov/rus/water/well.htm* . You may also request application guides and materials by contacting the Water and Environmental Staff at
(202)720-9589. Submit electronic grant applications through *http://www.grants.gov* (Grants.gov), following the instructions on that Web site. Submit completed paper applications to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Rural Development Utilities Programs, Mail Stop #1570, Room 2233-S, 1400 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20250-1570. Applications should be marked “Attention: Water and Environmental Programs.” FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cheryl Francis, Loan Specialist, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Rural Development Utilities Programs, Water and Environmental Programs, telephone:
(202)720-1937, fax:
(202)690-0649, e-mail: *cheryl.francis@wdc.usda.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Overview *Federal Agency:* Rural Utilities Service (RUS). *Funding Opportunity Title:* Household Water Well System Grant Program. *Announcement Type:* Grant—Initial. *Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
(CFDA)Number:* 10.862. *Due Date for Applications:* May 31, 2008. Items in Supplementary Information I. Funding Opportunity: Description of the Household Water Well System Grant Program. II. Award Information: Available funds. III. Eligibility Information: Who is eligible, what kinds of projects are eligible, what criteria determine basic eligibility. IV. Application and Submission Information: Where to get application materials, what constitutes a completed application, how and where to submit applications, deadlines, items that are eligible. V. Application Review Information: Considerations and preferences, scoring criteria, review standards, selection information. VI. Award Administration Information: Award notice information, award recipient reporting requirements. VII. Agency Contacts: Web, phone, fax, e-mail, contact name. I. Funding Opportunity A. Program Description The Household Water Well System
(HWWS)Grant Program has been established to help individuals with low to moderate incomes finance the costs of household water wells that they own or will own. The HWWS Grant Program is authorized under Section 6012 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (The Act), Public Law 107-171. The Act authorizes the Rural Utilities Service, an agency delivering the United States Department of Agriculture's
(USDA)Rural Development Utilities Programs, to make grants to qualified private non-profit organizations to establish lending programs for household water wells. As grant recipients, non-profit organizations will receive HWWS grants to establish lending programs that will provide water well loans to individuals. The individuals, as loan recipients, may use the loans to construct, refurbish, and service their household well systems. A loan may not exceed $8,000 and will have a term of up to 20 years at a one percent annual interest rate. B. Background Rural Development supports the sound development of rural communities and the growth of our economy without endangering the environment. Rural Development provides financial and technical assistance to help communities bring safe drinking water and sanitary, environmentally sound waste disposal facilities to rural Americans in greatest need. Central water systems may not be the only or best solution to drinking water problems. Distance or physical barriers make public central water systems expensive in remote areas. A significant number of geographically isolated households without water service might require individual wells rather than connections to new or existing community systems. The goal of Rural Development is not only to make funds available to those communities most in need of potable water but also to ensure that facilities used to deliver drinking water are safe and affordable. There is a role for private wells in reaching this goal. C. Purpose The purpose of the HWWS Grant Program is to provide funds to non-profit organizations to assist them in establishing loan programs from which individuals may borrow money for household water well systems. Applicants must show that the project will provide technical and financial assistance to eligible individuals to remedy household well problems. Priority will be given to the non-profit organizations that: 1. Demonstrate experience in promoting safe, productive uses of household water wells and ground water. 2. Demonstrate significant management experience in making and servicing loans to individuals. 3. Contribute more than 50 percent of the grant amount in cash or other liquid assets in order to capitalize the revolving loan fund. 4. Propose to serve rural areas containing the smallest communities with a high percentage of low-income individuals eligible for loans. 5. Target areas which lack running water, flush toilets, and modern sewage disposal systems. Due to the limited amount of funds available under the HWWS Program, one or two applications may be funded from FY 2008 funds. Previously funded grant recipients must apply for a different target area to be considered for funding under this announcement. II. Award Information Funding Instrument Type: Grant. Anticipated Total Priority Area Funding: $993,000. Anticipated Number of Awards: 1 or 2. Length of Project Periods: 12-month project. Assistance Instrument: Grant Agreement with successful applicants before any grant funds are disbursed. III. Eligibility Information A. Who Is Eligible for Grants? 1. An organization is eligible to receive a Household Water Well grant if it: a. Is a private, non-profit organization that has tax-exempt status from the United States Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Faith-based organizations are eligible and encouraged to apply for this program. b. Is legally established and located within one of the following:
(1)A state within the United States.
(2)The District of Columbia.
(3)The Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.
(4)A United States territory. c. Has the legal capacity and authority to carry out the grant purpose; d. Has sufficient expertise and experience in lending activities; e. Has sufficient expertise and experience in promoting the safe and productive use of individually-owned household water well systems and ground water; f. Has no delinquent debt to the Federal Government or no outstanding judgments to repay a Federal debt; g. Demonstrates that it possesses the financial, technical, and managerial capability to comply with Federal and State laws and requirements. 2. An individual is ineligible to receive a Household Water Well grant. An individual may receive only a loan. B. What are the Basic Eligibility Requirements for a Project? 1. *Project Eligibility.* To be eligible for a grant, the project must: a. Be a revolving loan fund created to provide loans to eligible individuals to construct, refurbish, and service individually-owned household water well systems (see 7 CFR 1776.11 and 1776.12). Loans may not be provided for home sewer or septic system projects. b. Be established and maintained by a private, non-profit organization. c. Be located in a rural area. Rural area is defined as locations other than cities or towns of more than 50,000 people and the adjacent urbanized area of such towns and cities. 2. *Required Matching Contributions.* Grant applicants must provide written evidence of a matching contribution of at least 10 percent from sources other than the proceeds of a HWWS grant. In-kind contributions will not be considered for the matching requirement. Please see 7 CFR 1776.9 for the requirement. 3. *Other—Requirements.* a. DUNS Number. An organization must have a Dun and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System
(DUNS)number. A DUNS number will be required whether an applicant is submitting a paper application or an electronic application through *www.grants.gov.* To verify that your organization has a DUNS number or to receive one at no cost, call the dedicated toll-free request line at 1-866-705-5711 or request one on-line at *http://www.dnb.com.* b. Eligibility for Loans. Individuals are not eligible for grants but are eligible for loans. To be eligible for a loan, an individual must:
(1)Be a member of a household of which the combined household income of all members does not exceed 100 percent of the median non-metropolitan household income for the State or territory in which the individual resides. Household income is the total income from all sources received by each adult household member for the most recent 12-month period for which the information is available. It does not include income earned or received by dependent children under 18 years old or other benefits that are excluded by Federal law. The non-metropolitan household income must be based on the most recent decennial census of the United States. Rural Development publishes a list of income exclusions in 7 CFR 3550.54(b). Also, a list of federally Mandated Exclusions from Income, published by the Department of Housing and Urban Development may be found in the **Federal Register** , April 20, 2001 at 66 FR 20318.
(2)Own and occupy the home being improved with the proceeds of the Household Water Well loan or be purchasing the home to occupy under a legally enforceable land purchase contract which is not in default by either the seller or the purchaser.
(3)Own the home in a rural area.
(4)Not use the loan for a water well system associated with the construction of a new dwelling.
(5)Not use the loan to substitute a well for water service available from collective water systems. (For example, a loan may not be used to restore an old well that was abandoned when a dwelling was connected to a water district's water line.)
(6)Not be suspended or debarred from participation in Federal programs. IV. Application and Submission Information A. Where To Get Application Information The application guide, copies of necessary forms and samples, and the HWWS Grant regulation are available from these sources: 1. On-line for electronic copies: *http://www.grants.gov* or *http://www.usda.gov/rus/water/well.htm,* and 2. Rural Development for paper copies. Rural Development Utilities Programs, Water Programs Division, Room 2234 South, Stop 1570, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250-1570, Telephone:
(202)720-9589; Fax
(202)690-0649. B. Content and Form of Application Submission 1. Rules and Guidelines a. Detailed information on each item required can be found in the Household Water Well System Grant Program regulation and the Household Water Well System Grant Application Guide. Applicants are strongly encouraged to read and apply both the regulation and the application guide. This Notice does not change the requirements for a completed application for any form of HWWS financial assistance specified in the regulation. The regulation and application guide provide specific guidance on each of the items listed. b. Applications should be prepared in conformance with the provisions in 7 CFR 1776, subpart B, and applicable USDA regulations including 7 CFR parts 3015 and 3019. Applicants should use the Household Water Well System Grant Application Guide which contains instructions and other important information in preparing their application. Completed applications must include the items found in the checklist in the next paragraph. 2. Checklist of Items in Completed Application Packages The forms in items 1 through 6 must be completed and signed where appropriate by an official of your organization who has authority to obligate the organization legally. The forms may be found on-line at the Rural Development Web site: *http://www.usda.gov/rus/water/wwforms.htm.* See section V, “Application Review Information,” for instructions and guidelines on preparing Items 7 through 13. Application items 1. SF-424, “Application for Federal Assistance”. 2. SF-424A, “Budget Information—Non-Construction Programs”. 3. SF-424B, “Assurances—Non-Construction Programs”. 4. SF-LLL, “Disclosure of Lobbying Activity”. 5. Form RD 400-1, “Equal Opportunity Agreement”. 6. Form RD 400-4, “Assurance Agreement (Under Title VI, Civil Rights Act of 1964). 7. Project Proposal. Project Summary. Needs Assessment. Project Goals and Objectives. Project Narrative. 8. Work Plan. 9. Budget and Budget Justification. 10. Evidence of Legal Authority and Existence. 11. Documentation of non-profit status and IRS Tax Exempt Status. 12. List of Directors and Officers. 13. Financial information and sustainability (narrative). 14. Assurances and Certifications of Compliance with Other Federal Statutes. 3. *Compliance with Other Federal Statutes.* The applicant must provide evidence of compliance with other Federal statutes and regulations, including, but not limited to the following: a. 7 CFR part 15, subpart A—Nondiscrimination in Federally Assisted Programs of the Department of Agriculture—Effectuation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. b. 7 CFR part 3015—Uniform Federal Assistance Regulations. c. 7 CFR part 3017—Government wide Debarment and Suspension (Non-procurement). d. 7 CFR part 3018—New Restrictions on Lobbying. e. 7 CFR part 3021—Government wide Requirements for Drug-Free Workplace (Financial Assistance). f. Executive Order 13166, “Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency.” For information on limited English proficiency and agency-specific guidance, go to *http://www.LEP.gov.* g. Federal Obligation Certification on Delinquent Debt. C. How Many Copies of an Application Are Required? *1. Applications Submitted on Paper.* Submit one signed original and two additional copies. The original and each of the two copies must include all required forms, certifications, assurances, and appendices, be signed by an authorized representative, and have original signatures. Do not include organizational brochures or promotional materials. *2. Applications Submitted Electronically.* The additional paper copies are unnecessary if the application is submitted electronically through *www.grants.gov.* D. How and Where To Submit an Application 1. Submitting Paper Applications a. For paper applications mail or ensure delivery of an original paper application (no stamped, photocopied, or initialed signatures) and two copies by the deadline date to: Rural Development Utilities Programs, Water Programs Division, Room 2234 South, Stop 1570, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250-1570. b. Applications must show proof of mailing or shipping by one of the following:
(1)A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service
(USPS)postmark;
(2)A legible mail receipt with the date of mailing stamped by the USPS; or
(3)A dated shipping label, invoice, or receipt from a commercial carrier. c. If a deadline date falls on a weekend, it will be extended to the following Monday. If the date falls on a Federal holiday, it will be extended to the next business day. d. Due to screening procedures at the U.S. Department of Agriculture, packages arriving via the USPS are irradiated, which can damage the contents. Rural Development encourages applicants to consider the impact of this procedure in selecting an application delivery method. 2. Submitting Electronic Applications a. Applications will not be accepted via facsimile machine transmission or electronic mail. b. Electronic applications for grants will be accepted if submitted through *Grants.gov* at *http://www.grants.gov.* c. Applicants who apply through *Grants.gov* should submit their applications before the deadline. d. *Grants.gov* contains full instructions on all required passwords, credentialing, and software. Follow the instructions at *Grants.gov* for registering and submitting an electronic application. Rural Development may request original signatures on electronically submitted documents later. e. To use *Grants.gov* :
(1)Follow the instructions on the Web site to find grant information.
(2)Download a copy of an application package.
(3)Complete the package off-line.
(4)Upload and submit the application via the *Grants.gov* Web site. f. You must be registered with *Grants.gov* before you can submit a grant application.
(1)You will need a DUNS number to access or register at any of the services. In addition to the DUNS number required of all grant applicants, your organization must be listed in the Central Contractor Registry (CCR). If you have not used *Grants.gov* before, you will need to register with the CCR and the Credential Provider. Setting up a CCR listing (a one-time procedure with annual updates) takes up to five business days. Rural Development recommends that you obtain your organization's DUNS number and CCR listing well in advance of the deadline specified in this notice.
(2)The CCR registers your organization, housing your organizational information and allowing *Grants.gov* to use it to verify your identity. You may register for the CCR by calling the CCR Assistance Center at 1-888-227-2423 or you may register online at *http://www.ccr.gov.*
(3)The Credential Provider gives you or your representative a username and password, as part of the Federal Government's e-Authentication to ensure a secure transaction. You will need the username and password when you register with *Grants.gov* or use *Grants.gov* to submit your application. You must register with the Central Provider through *Grants.gov* at *https://apply.grants.gov/OrcRegister.*
(4)If a system problem or technical difficulty occurs with an electronic application, please use the customer support resources available at the *Grants.gov* Web site. E. Deadlines The deadline for paper and electronic submissions is May 31, 2008. Paper applications must be postmarked and mailed, shipped, or sent overnight no later than the closing date to be considered for FY 2008 grant funding. Electronic applications must have an electronic date and time stamp by midnight of May 31, 2008, to be considered on time. Rural Development will not accept applications by fax or e-mail. Applications that do not meet the criteria above are considered late applications and will not be considered. Rural Development will notify each late applicant that its application will not be considered. F. Funding Restrictions 1. Eligible Grant Purposes a. Grant funds must be used to establish and maintain a revolving loan fund to provide loans to eligible individuals for household water well systems. b. Individuals may use the loans to construct, refurbish, rehabilitate, or replace household water well systems up to the point of entry of a home. Point of entry for the well system is the junction where water enters into a home water delivery system after being pumped from a well. c. Grant funds may be used to pay administrative expenses associated with providing Household Water Well loans. 2. Ineligible Grant Purposes a. Administrative expenses incurred in any calendar year that exceed 10 percent of the HWWS loans made during the same period do not qualify for reimbursement. b. Administrative expenses incurred before Rural Development executes a grant agreement with the recipient do not qualify for reimbursement. c. Delinquent debt owed to the Federal Government. d. Grant funds may not be used to provide loans for household sewer or septic systems. e. Household Water Well loans may not be used to pay the costs of water well systems for the construction of a new house. f. Household Water Well loans may not be used to pay the costs of a home plumbing system. V. Application Review Information A. Criteria This section contains instructions and guidelines on preparing the project proposal, work plan, and budget sections of the application. Also, guidelines are provided on the additional information required for Rural Development to determine eligibility and financial feasibility. *1. Project Proposal.* The project proposal should outline the project in sufficient detail to provide a reader with a complete understanding of the loan program. Explain what will be accomplished by lending funds to individual well owners. Demonstrate the feasibility of the proposed loan program in meeting the objectives of this grant program. The proposal should include the following elements: *a. Project Summary.* Present a brief project overview. Explain the purpose of the project, how it relates to Rural Development's purposes, how the project will be executed, what the project will produce, and who will direct it. *b. Needs Assessment.* To show why the project is necessary, clearly identify the economic, social, financial, or other problems that require solutions. Demonstrate the well owners' need for financial and technical assistance. Quantify the number of prospective borrowers or provide statistical or narrative evidence that a sufficient number of borrowers will exist to justify the grant award. Describe the service area. Provide information on the household income of the area and other demographical information. Address community needs. *c. Project Goals and Objectives.* Clearly state the project goals. The objectives should clearly describe the goals and be concrete and specific enough to be quantitative or observable. They should also be feasible and relate to the purpose of the grant and loan program. *d. Project Narrative.* The narrative should cover in more detail the items briefly described in the Project Summary. Demonstrate the grant applicant's experience and expertise in promoting the safe and productive use of individually-owned household water well systems. The narrative should address the following points:
(1)Document the grant applicant's ability to manage and service a revolving fund. The narrative may describe the systems that are in place for the full life cycle of a loan from loan origination through servicing. If a servicing contractor will service the loan portfolio, the arrangement and services provided must be discussed.
(2)Show evidence that the organization can commit financial resources the organization controls. This documentation should describe the sources of funds other than the HWWS grant that will be used to pay your operational costs and provide financial assistance for projects.
(3)Demonstrate that the organization has secured commitments of significant financial support from other funding sources, if appropriate.
(4)List the fees and charges that borrowers will be assessed. *2. Work Plan.* The work plan or scope of work must describe the tasks and activities that will be accomplished with available resources during the grant period. It must include who will carry out the activities and services to be performed and specific timeframes for completion. Describe any unusual or unique features of the project such as innovations, reductions in cost or time, or extraordinary community involvement. *3. Budget and Budget Justification.* Both Federal and non-Federal resources shall be detailed and justified in the budget and narrative justification. “Federal resources” refers only to the HWWS grant for which you are applying. “Non Federal resources” are all other Federal and non-Federal resources. a. Provide a budget with line item detail and detailed calculations for each budget object class identified in section B of the Budget Information form (SF-424A). Detailed calculations must include estimation methods, quantities, unit costs, and other similar quantitative detail sufficient for the calculation to be duplicated. Also include a breakout by the funding sources identified in Block 15 of the SF-424. b. Provide a narrative budget justification that describes how the categorical costs are derived for all capital and administrative expenditures, the matching contribution, and other sources of funds necessary to complete the project. Discuss the necessity, reasonableness, and allocability of the proposed costs. Consult OMB Circular A-122: “Cost Principles for Non-Profit Organizations” for information about appropriate costs for each budget category. c. If the grant applicant will use a servicing contractor, the fees may be reimbursed as an administrative expense as provided in 7 CFR 1776.13. These fees must be discussed in the budget narrative. If the grant applicant will hire a servicing contractor, it must demonstrate that all procurement transactions will be conducted in a manner to provide, to the maximum extent practical, open and free competition. Recipients must justify any anticipated procurement action that is expected to be awarded without competition and exceed the simplified acquisition threshold fixed at 41 U.S.C. 403(11) (currently set at $100,000). d. The indirect cost category should be used only when the grant applicant currently has an indirect cost rate approved by the U.S. Department of Agriculture or another cognizant Federal agency. A grant applicant that will charge indirect costs to the grant must enclose a copy of the current rate agreement. If the grant applicant is in the process of initially developing or renegotiating a rate, the grant applicant shall submit its indirect cost proposal to the cognizant agency immediately after the applicant is advised that an award will be made. In no event, shall the indirect cost proposal be submitted later than three months after the effective date of the award. Consult OMB Circular A-122 for information about indirect costs. *4. Evidence of Legal Authority and Existence.* The applicant must provide satisfactory documentation that it is legally recognized under state and Federal law as a non-profit organization. The documentation also must show that it has the authority to enter into a grant agreement with Rural Development and to perform the activities proposed under the grant application. Satisfactory documentation includes, but is not limited to, certificates from the Secretary of State, or copies of state statutes or laws establishing your organization. Letters from the IRS awarding tax-exempt status are not considered adequate evidence. *5. List of Directors and Officers.* The applicant must submit a certified list of directors and officers with their respective terms. *6. IRS Tax Exempt Status.* The applicant must submit evidence of tax exempt status from the Internal Revenue Service. *7. Financial Information and Sustainability.* The applicant must submit pro forma balance sheets, income statements, and cash flow statements for the last three years and projections for three years. Additionally, the most recent audit of the applicant's organization must be submitted. B. Evaluation Criteria Grant applications that are complete and eligible will be scored competitively based on the following scoring criteria: Scoring criteria Points Degree of expertise and experience in promoting the safe and productive use of individually-owned household water well systems and ground water Up to 30 points. Degree of expertise and successful experience in making and servicing loans to individuals Up to 20 points. Percentage of applicant contributions. Points allowed under this paragraph will be based on written evidence of the availability of funds from sources other than the proceeds of a HWWS grant to pay part of the cost of a loan recipient's project. In-kind contributions will not be considered. Funds from other sources as a percentage of the HWWS grant and points corresponding to such percentages are as follows: 0 to 9 percent Ineligible. 10 to 25 percent 5 points. 26 to 30 percent 10 points. 31 to 50 percent 15 points. 51 percent or more 20 points. Extent to which the work plan demonstrates a well thought out, comprehensive approach to accomplishing the objectives of this part, clearly defines who will be served by the project, and appears likely to be sustainable Up to 20 points. Lowest ratio of projected administrative expenses to loans advanced Up to 10 points. Administrator's discretion, taking into consideration such factors as: Up to 10 points. Creative outreach ideas for marketing HWWS loans to rural residents; Amount of funds requested in relation to the amount of needs demonstrated in the proposal; Excellent utilization of a previous revolving loan fund; and Optimizing the use of agency resources Description of the service area, particularly the range of the area: State 10 points. Regional 15 points. National 20 points. Extent to which the problem or issue being addressed in the Needs Assessment is defined clearly and supported by data Up to 15 points. Extent to which the goals and objectives are clearly defined, tied to the need as defined in the Needs Assessment, and are measurable Up to 15 points. Extent to which the evaluation methods are specific to the program, clearly defined, measurable, with expected program outcomes Up to 20 points. C. Review Standards 1. Incomplete applications as of the deadline for submission will not be considered. If an application is determined to be incomplete, the applicant will be notified in writing and the application will be returned with no further action. 2. Ineligible applications will be returned to the applicant with an explanation. 3. Complete, eligible applications will be evaluated competitively by a review team, composed of at least two Rural Development employees selected from the Water Programs Division. They will make overall recommendations based on the program elements found in 7 CFR part 1776 and the review criteria presented in this notice. They will award points as described in the scoring criteria in 7 CFR 1776.9 and this notice. Each application will receive a score based on the averages of the reviewers' scores and discretionary points awarded by the Rural Utilities Service Administrator. 4. Applications will be ranked and grants awarded in rank order until all grant funds are expended. 5. Regardless of the score an application receives, if Rural Development determines that the project is technically infeasible, Rural Development will notify the applicant, in writing, and the application will be returned with no further action. VI. Award Administration Information A. Award Notices Rural Development will notify a successful applicant by an award letter accompanied by a grant agreement. The grant agreement will contain the terms and conditions for the grant. The applicant must execute and return the grant agreement, accompanied by any additional items required by the award letter or grant agreement. B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements 1. This notice, the 7 CFR 1776, and Household Water Well System Grant Program Application Guide implement the appropriate administrative and national policy requirements. Grant recipients are subject to the requirements in 7 CFR part 1776. 2. Direct Federal grants, sub-award funds, or contracts under the HWWS Program shall not be used to fund inherently religious activities, such as worship, religious instruction, or proselytization. Therefore, organizations that receive direct USDA assistance should take steps to separate, in time or location, their inherently religious activities from the services funded under the HWWS Program. USDA regulations pertaining to the Equal Treatment for Faith-based Organizations, which includes the prohibition against Federal funding of inherently religious activities, can be found either at the USDA Web site at *http://www.usda.gov/fbci/finalrule.pdf* or 7 CFR part 16. C. Reporting 1. *Performance Reporting* . All recipients of HWWS Grant Program financial assistance must provide quarterly performance activity reports to Rural Development until the project is complete and the funds are expended. A final performance report is also required. The final report may serve as the last annual report. The final report must include an evaluation of the success of the project. 2. *Financial Reporting* . All recipients of Household Water Well System Grant Program financial assistance must provide an annual audit, beginning with the first year a portion of the financial assistance is expended. The grantee will provide an audit report or financial statements as follows: a. Grantees expending $500,000 or more Federal funds per fiscal year will submit an audit conducted in accordance with OMB Circular A-133. The audit will be submitted within 9 months after the grantee's fiscal year. Additional audits may be required if the project period covers more than one fiscal year. b. Grantees expending less than $500,000 will provide annual financial statements covering the grant period, consisting of the organization's statement of income and expense and balance sheet signed by an appropriate official of the organization. Financial statements will be submitted within 90 days after the grantee's fiscal year. VII. Agency Contacts A. Web Site *http://www.usda.gov/rus/water* . The Rural Development's Web site maintains up-to-date resources and contact information for the Household Water Well program. B. Phone 202-720-9589. C. Fax 202-690-0649. D. E-mail *cheryl.francis@wdc.usda.gov* . E. Main Point of Contact Cheryl Francis, Loan Specialist, Water and Environmental Programs, Water Programs Division, Rural Development Utilities Programs, U.S. Department of Agriculture. Dated: January 11, 2008. James M. Andrew, Administrator, Rural Utilities Service. [FR Doc. E8-1379 Filed 1-25-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-15-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request The Department of Commerce will submit to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)for clearance the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35). *Agency:* U.S. Census Bureau. *Title:* Local Update of Census Addresses
(LUCA)Program. *Form Number(s):* D-1663 through D-1706. *OMB Control Number:* 0607-0795. *Type of Request:* Extension of a currently approved collection. *Burden Hours:* 3,909,829. *Number of Respondents:* 19,780. *Average Hours Per Response:* 197 hours and 40 minutes. *Needs and Uses:* The information to be collected in the Local Update of Census Addresses
(LUCA)Program is essential to the mission of the Census Bureau and will directly contribute to the successful outcome of Census 2010. The Census Bureau requested and received emergency clearance from OMB so that the LUCA Program start-up was not delayed. That emergency clearance expires February, 2008. The LUCA Program was developed by the U.S. Census Bureau to meet the requirements of the *Census Address List Improvement Act of 1994, Public Law 103-430.* Under the voluntary LUCA Program, participating governments may review the Census Bureau's confidential list of individual living quarters addresses and provide address additions, corrections, deletions, and/or the identification of corrected address counts for census blocks; street and street attribute updates; and legal boundary updates. Governments electing to participate in the LUCA program also provide program contact information; certification of their agreement to maintain the confidentiality of the Census Bureau address information; responses regarding their physical and information technology security capabilities; program option and product media preference information; shipment inventory information; certification of their return/destruction of materials containing confidential data; and, for participants not submitting address list changes, their reasons for not doing so. The program will be available to tribal, state, and local governments, and the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico (or their designated representatives) in areas for which the Census Bureau performs a precensus address canvassing operation (excluded are sparsely settled areas in the states of Alaska and Maine). The LUCA program includes federally-recognized American Indian tribes with reservations and/or off-reservation trust lands, states, and general-purpose local governments, such as cities and townships, for which the Census Bureau reports data. This information collection will occur between August 2007 and May 2008. The Census Bureau will use the LUCA program to help develop the housing unit and group quarters (e.g., college dormitory, nursing home, correctional facility, etc.) address information that it will need to conduct the 2010 Decennial Census. Because tribal, state, and local governments have current knowledge of and data about where housing growth and change are occurring in their jurisdictions, their input into the overall development of the address list for the census makes a vital contribution. . *Affected Public:* State, local or Tribal government. *Frequency:* One-time. *Respondent's Obligation:* Voluntary. *Legal Authority:* Title 13 U.S.C., Section 16. *OMB Desk Officer:* Brian Harris-Kojetin,
(202)395-7314. Copies of the above information collection proposal can be obtained by calling or writing Diana Hynek, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer,
(202)482-0266, Department of Commerce, Room 6625, 14th and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230 (or via the Internet at *dhynek@doc.gov* ). Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to Brian Harris-Kojetin, OMB Desk Officer either by fax (202-395-7245) or e-mail ( *bharrisk@omb.eop.gov* ). Dated: January 22, 2008. Gwellnar Banks, Management Analyst, Office of the Chief Information Officer. [FR Doc. E8-1410 Filed 1-25-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-07-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE U.S. Census Bureau Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Special Census Program AGENCY: U.S. Census Bureau, Department of Commerce. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). DATES: To ensure consideration, written comments must be submitted on or before March 28, 2008. ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments to Diana Hynek, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Department of Commerce, Room 6625, 14th and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230 (or via the Internet at *dHynek@doc.gov* ). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument(s) and instructions should be directed to J. Michael Stump, Bureau of the Census, 4600 Silver Hill Rd., Room 5H117, Washington, DC 20233 (or via the Internet at *j.michael.stump@census.gov* ). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Abstract The Special Census Program is a reimbursable service offered and performed by the Census Bureau for the government of any state; county, city, or other political subdivision within a state; for the government of the District of Columbia; and for the government of any possession or area over which the U.S. exercises jurisdiction, control, or sovereignty, and other governmental units which require current population data between decennial censuses. The Special Census Program will be closing down for this decade in 2009 and will startup again after the 2010 Decennial Census. We are requesting an extension of the expiration date of the Special Census Program through June 2009, at which time, the program will close down and will be unavailable until after the 2010 Decennial Census. Many states distribute funds based on current population statistics. In addition, special census data are used by the local jurisdictions to plan new schools, transportation systems, housing programs, and water treatment facilities. The Census Bureau will use the following forms to update addresses listed on the Census Bureau's Master Address File
(MAF)and to enumerate populations in special censuses: *SC-1,* Special Census Enumerator Questionnaire—This interview form will be used to collect special census data at regular housing units (HU). *SC-1 (SUPP),* Continuation Form for Enumerator Questionnaire—This interview form will be used to collect special census data at a regular HU when there are more than five members in a household. *SC-1 (Telephone),* Special Census Enumeration Questionnaire—This interview form will be used to collect special census data when a respondent calls the local special census office. *SC-2,* Special Census Special Place Questionnaire—This interview form will be used to collect special census data at group quarters
(GQ)in special places
(SP)such as hospitals, prisons, boarding and rooming houses, campgrounds, hotels, college dormitories, military facilities, and convents. *SC-116,* Group Quarters Enumeration Control Sheet—This page will be used by Special Census enumerators to list residents/clients at GQs. *SC-351,* Group Quarters Initial Contact Checklist—This checklist will be used by enumerators to collect contact information and to determine the type of GQ. *SC-920,* Address Listing Page—This page will include existing addresses from the MAF. Special Census enumerators will update these addresses, if needed, at the time of enumeration. *SC-921(HU),* Housing Unit Add Page—This page will be used by enumerators to add HUs that are observed to exist on the ground and that are not contained on the address listing page. *SC-921(SP),* Special Place/Group Quarter Add Page—This page will be used by enumerators to add SPs/GQs that are observed to exist on the ground and that are not reflected in the address listing page. The Special Census Program will operate as a generic OMB clearance including a library of forms and the operational procedures that will be used for the remaining special censuses we anticipate conducting this decade. The Census Bureau will establish a reimbursable agreement with a variety of potential special census customers that are unknown at this time. Census will submit for OMB's review and approval, using a change worksheet, any special-purpose questions requested by customers to be added to special census questionnaires. II. Method of Collection The Special Census Program will use the Census 2000 Update/Enumerate (U/E) methodology. Enumerators will canvass their assigned areas with an address register that contains addresses obtained from the MAF. Special Census enumerators will update the address information, as needed, based on their observation of HUs and/or SPs/GQs that exist on the ground. Additionally, enumerators will interview households at regular HUs and residents at GQs using the appropriate Special Census questionnaire. III. Data *OMB Control Number:* 0607-0368. *Form Numbers:* SC-1, SC-1(SUPP), SC-1(Telephone), SC-2, SC-116, SC-351, SC-920, SC-921(HU), SC-921(SP). *Type of Review:* Regular submission. *Affected Public:* Individuals or households, business or other for-profit organizations, not-for-profit institutions. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* ( *June 2008 through June 2009* ) Enumerator Questionnaire—152,440 respondents. Special Place Questionnaire—1,200 respondents. Address Listing Page—152,440 respondents. Group Quarters Enumeration Control Sheet—150 respondents. Housing Unit Add Page—5,000 respondents. Special Place/Group Quarters Add Page—75 respondents. Group Quarters Initial Contact Checklist—150 respondents. *Estimated Time Per Response:* Enumerator Questionnaire—7 minutes. Special Place Questionnaire—5 minutes. Address Listing Page—1 minute. Group Quarters Enumeration Control Sheet—10 minutes. Housing Unit Add Page—1 minute. Special Place/Group Quarters Add Page—1 minute. Group Quarters Initial Contact Checklist—10 minutes. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 20,560. *Estimated Total Annual Cost:* There are no costs to respondents other than that of their time to respond. *Respondent's Obligation:* Voluntary. *Legal Authority:* Title 13, United States Code, section 196. IV. Request for Comments Comments are invited on:
(a)Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility;
(b)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information;
(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 through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval of this information collection; they also will become a matter of public record. Dated: January 22, 2008. Gwellnar Banks, Management Analyst, Office of the Chief Information Officer. [FR Doc. E8-1409 Filed 1-25-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-07-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-928, A-791-821, A-552-803] Uncovered Innerspring Units From the People's Republic of China, South Africa, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. EFFECTIVE DATE: January 28, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erin Begnal at
(202)482-1442 or Scot Fullerton at
(202)482-1386 (People's Republic of China), AD/CVD Operations, Office 9; Dmitry Vladimirov at
(202)482-0665 or Minoo Hatten at
(202)482-1690 (South Africa), AD/CVD Operations, Office 5; Eugene Degnan at
(202)482-0414 or Robert Bolling at
(202)482-3434 (Socialist Republic of Vietnam), AD/CVD Operations, Office 8, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Petitions On December 31, 2007, the Department of Commerce (the Department) received petitions concerning imports of uncovered innerspring units from the People's Republic of China (the PRC), South Africa, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (Vietnam) (collectively, the Petitions) filed in proper form by Leggett and Platt, Incorporated (the petitioner). See Petitions on Uncovered Innerspring Units from China, South Africa, and Vietnam (December 31, 2007). On January 7, 2008, the Department issued a request for additional information and clarification of certain areas in the Petitions. Based on the Department's requests, the petitioner filed additional information on January 11, 2008 (four distinct submissions on general issues, PRC-specific material (PRC Supplement to the Petition), Vietnam-specific material (Vietnam Supplement to the Petition), and South Africa-specific material (South Africa Supplement to the Petition)), and on January 16, 2008 (two distinct submissions on PRC-specific material (PRC Second Supplement to the Petition) and Vietnam-specific material (Vietnam Second Supplement to the Petition)). In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the petitioner alleges that imports of uncovered innerspring units from the PRC, South Africa, and Vietnam are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value, within the meaning of section 731 of the Act, and that such imports are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, an industry in the United States. The Department finds that the petitioner filed these Petitions on behalf of the domestic industry because the petitioner is an interested party as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act and has demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the initiation of the antidumping duty investigations that the petitioner is requesting. See the “Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions” section below. Period of Investigation Because the Petitions were filed on December 31, 2007, the anticipated period of investigation
(POI)for the PRC and Vietnam is April 1, 2007, through September 30, 2007. The anticipated POI for South Africa is October 1, 2006, through September 30, 2007. See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1). Scope of Investigations The merchandise covered by each of these investigations is uncovered innerspring units composed of a series of individual metal springs joined together in sizes corresponding to the sizes of adult mattresses ( *e.g.* , twin, twin long, full, full long, queen, California king, and king) and units used in smaller constructions, such as crib and youth mattresses. All uncovered innerspring units are included in this scope regardless of width and length. Included within this definition are innersprings typically ranging from 30.5 inches to 76 inches in width and 68 inches to 84 inches in length. Innersprings for crib mattresses typically range from 25 inches to 27 inches in width and 50 inches to 52 inches in length. Uncovered innerspring units are suitable for use as the innerspring component in the manufacture of innerspring mattresses, including mattresses that incorporate a foam encasement around the innerspring. Pocketed and non-pocketed innerspring units are included in this definition. Non-pocketed innersprings are typically joined together with helical wire and border rods. Non-pocketed innersprings are included in this definition regardless of whether they have border rods attached to the perimeter of the innerspring. Pocketed innersprings are individual coils covered by a “pocket” or “sock” of a nonwoven synthetic material or woven material and then glued together in a linear fashion. Uncovered innersprings are classified under subheading 9404.29.9010 and have also been classified under subheadings 9404.10.0000, 7326.20.00.70, 7320.20.5010, or 7320.90.5010 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). The HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes only; the written description of the scope of these investigations is dispositive. Comments on Scope of Investigations During our review of the Petitions, we discussed the scope with the petitioner to ensure that it is an accurate reflection of the products for which the domestic industry is seeking relief. Moreover, as discussed in the preamble to the regulations ( *Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final Rule* , 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997)), we are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues regarding product coverage. The Department encourages all interested parties to submit such comments within 20 calendar days of signature of this notice. Comments should be addressed to Import Administration's Central Records Unit (CRU), Room 1870, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230. The period of scope consultations is intended to provide the Department with ample opportunity to consider all comments and to consult with parties prior to the issuance of the preliminary determinations. Comments on Product Characteristics for Antidumping Duty Questionnaires We are requesting comments from interested parties regarding the appropriate physical characteristics of uncovered innerspring units to be reported in response to our antidumping duty questionnaires. This information will be used to identify the key physical characteristics of the subject merchandise in order for the respondents to report the relevant factors and costs of production accurately, as well as to develop appropriate product-comparison criteria. Interested parties may provide any information or comments that they feel are relevant to the development of an accurate list of physical characteristics. Specifically, they may provide comments as to which characteristics are appropriate to use as the general product characteristics and the product-comparison criteria. It is not always appropriate to use all product characteristics as product-comparison criteria. We base product-comparison criteria on meaningful commercial differences among products. In other words, while there may be some physical product characteristics which manufacturers use to describe uncovered innerspring units, it may be that only select few product characteristics take into account commercially meaningful physical characteristics. In addition, interested parties may comment on the order in which the physical characteristics should be used in matching products. The Department attempts to rank the most important physical characteristics first and the least important characteristics last. In order to consider the suggestions of interested parties in developing and issuing the antidumping duty questionnaires, we must receive comments at the above-referenced address by February 11, 2008. Additionally, rebuttal comments must be received by February 21, 2008. Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on behalf of the domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic producers or workers who support the petition account for
(i)at least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product and
(ii)more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of the total production of the domestic like product, the Department shall
(i)poll the industry or rely on other information in order to determine if there is support for the petition, as required by subparagraph (A), or
(ii)determine industry support using a statistically valid sampling method. Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the “industry” as the producers as a whole of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the statute directs the Department to look to producers and workers who produce the domestic like product. The International Trade Commission (ITC), which is responsible for determining whether “the domestic industry” has been injured, must also determine what constitutes a domestic like product in order to define the industry. While both the Department and the ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic like product (section 771(10) of the Act), they do so for different purposes and pursuant to a separate and distinct authority. In addition, the Department's determination is subject to limitations of time and information. Although this may result in different definitions of the like product, such differences do not render the decision of either agency contrary to law. See *USEC, Inc.* v. *United States* , 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT 2001), citing *Algoma Steel Corp. Ltd.* v. *United States* , 688 F. Supp. 639, 644 (1988), aff'd 865 F.2d 240 (CAFC 1989), *cert.* denied 492 U.S. 919 (1989). Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as “a product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation under this subtitle.” Thus, the reference point from which the analysis of the domestic like product begins is “the article subject to an investigation” ( *i.e.* , the class or kind of merchandise to be investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the petition). With regard to the domestic like product, the petitioner does not offer a definition of domestic like product distinct from the scope of the investigation. Based on our analysis of the information submitted on the record, we have determined that uncovered innerspring units constitute a single domestic like product and we have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like product. For a discussion of the domestic-like-product analysis in this case, see the following documents, on file in the Central Records Unit, Room 1117 of the main Department of Commerce building: Antidumping Investigation Initiation Checklist: Uncovered Innerspring Units from the People's Republic of China (PRC Initiation Checklist), Industry Support at Attachment II; the Antidumping Investigation Initiation Checklist: Uncovered Innerspring Units from South Africa (South Africa Initiation Checklist), Industry Support at Attachment II; and the Antidumping Investigation Initiation Checklist: Uncovered Innerspring Units from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (Vietnam Initiation Checklist), Industry Support at Attachment II. The Department's review of the data provided in the Petitions, supplemental submissions, and other information readily available to the Department indicates that the petitioner has established industry support. First, the Petitions established support from domestic producers (or workers) accounting for more than 50 percent of the total production of the domestic like product and, as such, the Department is not required to take further action in order to evaluate industry support. See, *e.g.* , section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act. Second, the domestic producers have met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petitions account for at least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product. Finally, the domestic producers have met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petitions account for more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the Petitions. Accordingly, the Department determines that the Petitions were filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of section 732(b)(1) of the Act. See PRC Initiation Checklist at Attachment II (Industry Support), South Africa Initiation Checklist at Attachment II (Industry Support), and Vietnam Initiation Checklist at Attachment II (Industry Support). The Department finds that the petitioner filed the Petitions on behalf of the domestic industry because it is an interested party as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act and it has demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the initiation of the antidumping investigations that it is requesting. See *id* . Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation The petitioner alleges that the U.S. industry producing the domestic like product is being materially injured, or is threatened with material injury, by reason of the imports of the subject merchandise sold at less than normal value. The petitioner contends that the industry's injured condition is illustrated by the following circumstances: reduced market share; lost sales; reduced production capacity and capacity-utilization rate; reduced shipments; underselling and price depressing and suppressing effects; lost revenue; reduced employment; decline in financial performance; an increase in import penetration. We have assessed the allegations and supporting evidence regarding material injury and causation, and we have determined that these allegations are properly supported by adequate evidence and meet the statutory requirements for initiation. See PRC Initiation Checklist at Attachment III (Injury), South Africa Initiation Checklist at Attachment III (Injury), and Vietnam Initiation Checklist at Attachment III (Injury). Allegations of Sales at Less Than Fair Value The following is a description of the allegations of sales at less than fair value upon which the Department based its decision to initiate these investigations of imports of uncovered innerspring units from the PRC, South Africa, and Vietnam. The sources of data for the deductions and adjustments relating to the U.S. prices, a home-market price (for South Africa), and the factors of production (for the PRC and Vietnam) are also discussed in the country-specific initiation checklists. See PRC Initiation Checklist, South Africa Initiation Checklist, and Vietnam Initiation Checklist. Should the need arise to use any of this information as facts available under section 776 of the Act in our preliminary or final determinations, we will reexamine the information and revise the margin calculations, if appropriate. PRC Export Price For U.S. price, the petitioner relied on price quotes for three specific models of Chinese-manufactured uncovered innerspring units that were offered for sale during the POI. See Petitions, Volume II at 1 and Exhibit PRC-1, and the PRC Supplement to the Petition at 1 and Exhibit 2. The petitioner deducted from the starting price the costs associated with exporting and delivering the product, including a distributor markup fee, ocean freight and insurance charges, U.S. duty, port and wharfage fees, domestic inland freight, and domestic brokerage and handling charges. See Petitions, Volume II at 2-4 and Exhibit PRC-2, and the PRC Supplement to the Petition at Exhibit 8. Normal Value The petitioner asserts that the Department considers the PRC to be a non-market-economy country
(NME)and, therefore, constructed normal value based on the factors-of-production methodology pursuant to section 773(c) of the Act. Recently, the Department examined the PRC's market status and determined that NME status should continue for the PRC. See *Memorandum from the Office of Policy to David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, Regarding the People's Republic of China Status as a Non-Market Economy* , dated May 15, 2006. (This document is available online at *http://ia.ita.doc.gov/download/prc-nme-status/prc-nme-status-memo.pdf.* ) In addition, in two recent investigations, the Department treated the PRC as an NME country. See *Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Activated Carbon from the People's Republic of China* , 72 FR 9508 (March 2, 2007), and *Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Partial Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances: Certain Polyester Staple Fiber from the People's Republic of China* , 72 FR 19690 (April 19, 2007). In accordance with section 771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, the NME status remains in effect until revoked by the Department. The NME status of the PRC has not been revoked by the Department and, therefore, remains in effect for purposes of the initiation of this investigation. Accordingly, the normal value of the product is appropriately based on factors of production valued in a surrogate market-economy country in accordance with section 773(c) of the Act. In the course of this investigation, all parties will have the opportunity to provide relevant information related to the issues of the PRC's NME status and the granting of separate rates to individual exporters. The petitioner asserts that India is the appropriate surrogate country for valuing the factors of production for the PRC because India is
(1)a significant producer of identical merchandise and
(2)at a level of economic development comparable to that of the PRC. See Petitions, Volume II at 5-6 and Exhibit PRC-6. Because the information provided in the Petitions satisfies the elements for selecting a surrogate country, we believe that the petitioner's use of India as a surrogate country is appropriate for purposes of initiating this investigation. After the initiation of the investigation, we will solicit comments regarding selection of a surrogate country. Also, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3)(i), interested parties will be provided with an opportunity to submit publicly available information to value the factors of production within 40 days of the date of publication of the preliminary determination. The petitioner provided dumping-margin calculations using the Department's NME methodology as required by 19 CFR 351.202(b)(7)(i)(C) and 19 CFR 351.408. The petitioner calculated normal value for the U.S. prices discussed above based on its own experience for producing uncovered innerspring units, which it states is consistent with the standard methodology for the production of uncovered innerspring units. The petitioner also states that Chinese producers use substantially the same material inputs and production processes as U.S. producers. See Petitions, Volume II at 6-12 and Exhibit PRC-7. The petitioner states that the primary material used to produce both “pocketed” and “non-pocketed” uncovered innerspring units is carbon steel wire. See Petitions, Volume II at pages 9 and Exhibit PRC-7. For the normal-value calculations, pursuant to section 773(c)(4) of the Act, the petitioner used surrogate values from a variety of sources, including Indian import statistics from the *World Trade Atlas* , the International Energy Agency's
(IEA)*Energy Prices & Taxes 2003* edition, the Department's NME Wage Rate for the PRC, the American Chemistry Council, and publicly available financial statements, to value the factors of production. See Petitions, Volume II at 6-13 and Exhibits PRC 8-16, the PRC Supplement to the Petition at Exhibits 9 and 10, and the PRC Second Supplement to the Petition at Exhibit 2. The petitioner converted the inputs valued in Indian rupees to U.S. dollars based on the average rupee/U.S. dollar exchange rate for the POI, as reported on the Department's Web site at *http://ia.ita.doc.gov/exchange/index.html* . The petitioner identifies steel wire, steel clips, fabric, and industrial glue as raw materials in the production of uncovered innerspring units. For steel wire, the main raw material in the production of uncovered innerspring units, the petitioner provided a surrogate value based on Indian imports from November 2006 through April 2007, inflated to the POI using a Wholesale Price Index
(WPI)inflator. See Petitions, Volume II at 9-10 and Exhibit PRC-9, and the PRC Supplement to the Petition at Exhibit 10. For steel clips, the petitioner has provided a surrogate value based on Indian imports from June 2005 through May 2006 used previously by the Department, inflated to the POI using a WPI inflator. *Id* . For fabric, the petitioner has provided a surrogate value based on Indian imports from November 2006 through April 2007, inflated to the POI using a WPI inflator. *Id* . For labor, the petitioner submitted a labor-usage rate which was valued using the Department's NME Wage Rate for the PRC. See Petitions, Volume II at 11 and Exhibits PRC-7 and PRC-10, and the PRC Supplement to the Petition at 6 and Exhibits 9 and 10. The petitioner has submitted two surrogate values for energy inputs, *i.e.* , electricity and natural gas. With regard to electricity, the petitioner provided a surrogate value using the IEA's *Energy Prices & Taxes* 2003 edition, which petitioner inflated to the POI, as the electricity value is based on the price paid by industrial users in India in 2000. See Petitions, Volume II at 11-12 and Exhibit PRC-11. With regard to natural gas, the petitioner provided a surrogate value from the American Chemistry Council, which the Department has used in a previous investigation. See Petitions, Volume II at 11-12 and Exhibit PRC-12, and the PRC Supplement to the Petition at 7 and Exhibit 10. The petitioner valued six packing inputs: plastic wrap, paper, labels, steel straps, pallets, and ladders/crates. For each packing input, the petitioner used Indian import statistics obtained through the *World Trade Atlas* and excluded data pertaining to NME and subsidy countries. See Petitions, Volume II at 10-11 and Exhibits PRC-1, PRC-8 and PRC-13, and the PRC Supplement to the Petition at 7-8 and Exhibit 10. For the normal-value calculations, the petitioner submitted the figures for factory overhead, selling, general, and administrative expenses, and profit from the financial ratios of an Indian producer of fabricated wire products, Lakshmi Precision Screws Limited. The Department used these ratios to initiate two other recent investigations and the financial statements covered the period of April 2005 to March 2006. See Petitions, Volume II at 3 and Exhibit PRC-15. We did not make any adjustments to the normal value as calculated by the petitioner because we determined that the petitioner used adequate sources and has calculated normal value accurately using those sources. Vietnam Export Price The petitioner based its U.S. price calculation on a price quote for a specific model of uncovered innerspring units produced in Vietnam that were offered for sale before the POI. The petitioner states that this price quote remained in effect during the POI. See the Vietnam Second Supplement to the Petition, at Exhibit 1. The petitioner calculated an average net U.S. Price by subtracting an estimate for U.S. distributor markup, ocean freight, marine insurance, U.S. port charges, foreign inland freight, and brokerage and handling costs from the gross unit price reflected in the price quote of imports for the POI. See *id.* at Exhibit 2. Normal Value Because the Department considers Vietnam to be an NME country, the petitioner constructed normal value based on the factors-of-production methodology pursuant to section 773(c) of the Act. The Department has examined Vietnam's market status and determined that Vietnam should be treated as an NME. See *Memorandum from the Office of Policy to Faryar Shirzad, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Frozen Fish Fillets from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam—Determination of Market Economy Status* , November 8, 2002 (this document is available online at *http://ia.ita.doc.gov/download/vietnam-nme-status/vietnam-market-status-determination.pdf* ). In addition, in two recent administrative reviews, the Department treated Vietnam as an NME country. *See Certain Frozen Fish Fillets From the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Final Results of the Second Administrative Review* , 72 FR 13242 (March 21, 2007), and *Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp From the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Final Results of the First Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and First New Shipper Review* , 72 FR 52052 (September 12, 2007). In accordance with section 771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, the NME status remains in effect until revoked by the Department. The presumption of the NME status of Vietnam has not been revoked by the Department and, therefore, remains in effect for purposes of the initiation of this investigation. Accordingly, the normal value of the product is based on factors of production valued in a surrogate market-economy country in accordance with section 773(c) of the Act. During the course of this investigation, all parties will have the opportunity to provide relevant information related to the issues of Vietnam's NME status and the granting of separate rates to individual exporters. The petitioner asserts that India is the most appropriate surrogate country for Vietnam because India is a significant producer of comparable merchandise and at a level of economic development comparable to Vietnam. See Petitions, Volume IV at 5-7. Because the information provided in the Petitions satisfies the elements for selecting a surrogate country, we believe that the petitioner's use of India as a surrogate country is appropriate for purposes of initiating this investigation. After the initiation of the investigation, we will solicit comments regarding surrogate-country selection. Also, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3)(i), interested parties will be provided with an opportunity to submit publicly available information to value the factors of production within 40 calendar days after the date of publication of the preliminary determination. The petitioner provided dumping-margin calculations using the Department's NME methodology as required by 19 CFR 351.202(b)(7)(i)(C) and 19 CFR 351.408. The petitioner calculated normal value based on its own consumption rates of raw materials, labor, and energy inputs used in 2007. The petitioner asserts that, to the best of its knowledge, these consumption amounts should be similar to those used by Vietnamese producers, except for the use of natural gas, which is discussed below. See Petitions, Volume IV at 8. Pursuant to section 773(c)(4) of the Act, the petitioner used surrogate values derived from publicly available sources to value the factors of production. For direct materials and packing materials, the petitioner calculated weighted-average surrogate values using Indian import statistics from the *World Trade Atlas* or values calculated by the Department in previous cases using Indian import statistics from the *World Trade Atlas.* See Petitions, Volume IV at Exhibit V-9 and V-13. Consistent with the Department's practice, the petitioner excluded from its weighted-average calculation imports from NME countries and countries that may provide broadly available non-industry-specific export subsidies. Finally, the petitioner added a value to the material inputs to account for freight charges. The petitioner calculated the freight charge based on the estimated distance from several of the Vietnamese producers to the nearest port in Ho Chi Minh City. See Petitions, Volume IV at Exhibit V-16, and the Vietnam Supplement to the Petition, at 1 and Exhibits 1 and 8. The petitioner valued labor using the expected wage rate for Vietnam provided by the Department on its website. See Petitions, Volume IV at Exhibit V-10. For electricity, the petitioner provided a surrogate value from the *International Energy Agency's Key World Energy Statistics 2003* , as cited in the Memorandum to the File, entitled “Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Glycine from the People's Republic of China: Surrogate Values for the Preliminary Results,” April 2, 2007. See Petitions, Volume IV at Exhibit V-11. The petitioner asserts that, although it no longer uses natural gas-heated ovens to temper its coils, it believes that the Vietnamese producers still use this process. The petitioner asserts that, therefore, it is using its own past experience of using natural gas-heated ovens to temper the coils as the best available estimate of the Vietnamese production process. To value natural gas, the petitioner provided a surrogate value from the *American Chemistry Council* , which the Department has used in a previous investigation of steel wire garment hangers from the People's Republic of China. See Petitions, Volume IV at Exhibit V-12. The petitioner converted the inputs valued in Indian rupees to U.S. dollars based on the average rupee/U.S. dollar exchange rate for the POI, as reported on the Department's Web site at *http://ia.ita.doc.gov/exchange/index.html.* When the surrogate values were not contemporaneous with the POI, the petitioner adjusted the values using the wholesale price index in India as published in the *International Financial Statistics* of the International Monetary Fund. See Petitions, Volume IV at Exhibits V-9 through V-14. For the normal-value calculations, the petitioner derived the figures for factory overhead, selling, general, and administrative expenses, and profit from the financial statements of Lakshmi Precision Screw, an Indian producer of fabricated wire products. The financial statement that the petitioner provided covered the period of April 2005 to March 2006. We did not make any adjustments to the normal value as calculated by the petitioner because we determined that the petitioner used adequate sources and has calculated normal value accurately using those sources. South Africa Export Price The petitioner calculated export price based on pricing information during the POI obtained from its U.S. customer of South African-produced uncovered innerspring units sold, or offered for sale, by U.S. importers of the subject merchandise. See Petitions, Volume III at 1-2 and Exhibits SA-1 and SA-2, and the South Africa Supplement to the Petition at page 1. The petitioner made adjustments to the starting price, where applicable, for foreign inland freight, ocean freight, marine insurance, and U.S. customs and port fees. The petitioner calculated foreign inland freight based on the petitioner's South African subsidiary's transportation experience and the related shipping costs it incurs. The petitioner calculated ocean freight and marine insurance based on price quotes obtained from a freight forwarder and an insurance provider. U.S. customs and port fees ( *i.e.* , harbor maintenance and processing fees) were based on standard U.S. government percentages, as applied to the petitioner's estimate of entered value. Normal Value The petitioner was able to estimate domestic South African prices for uncovered innerspring units using market intelligence gathered by its South African subsidiary on pricing information related to its competitor, a major manufacturer of the foreign like product. The petitioner also provided its South African subsidiary's actual price to an unaffiliated customer in South Africa for uncovered innerspring units it sold during the POI. See Petitions, Volume III at 4 and Exhibits SA-4 and SA-10, and the South Africa Supplement to the Petition at 2. Because the petitioner's South African subsidiary's actual price to an unaffiliated customer was sufficient to use in calculating normal value, we did not need to use the petitioner's estimate of a competitor's price offered for the foreign like product during the POI. See Petitions, Volume III at Exhibit SA-10. To arrive at normal value, the petitioner made adjustments to the starting price, where applicable, for home-market and U.S. credit expenses and U.S. packing costs. The petitioner did not make an adjustment to home-market price for foreign inland freight costs because it claims such costs are minimal due to the South African manufacturer's proximity to its customer. To calculate home-market credit expenses, the petitioner used the payment terms its South African subsidiary extends to its customer. The petitioner did not make an adjustment for home-market packing expenses because its South African subsidiary does not pack foreign like product for shipment to its customer. The petitioner calculated U.S. packing costs based on the experience of its South African subsidiary and the packing type it uses for export shipments. To calculate U.S. credit expenses, the petitioner used the payment terms associated with the pricing information of a U.S. sale, discussed above. Fair-Value Comparisons Based on the data provided by the petitioner, there is reason to believe that imports of uncovered innerspring units from the PRC, South Africa, and Vietnam are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value. Based on comparisons of export price to normal value, calculated in accordance with section 773(c) of the Act, the estimated dumping margins for uncovered innerspring units from the PRC range from 55.95 percent to 234.51 percent and the estimated dumping margin for uncovered innerspring units from Vietnam is 116.31. See PRC Initiation Checklist and Vietnam Initiation Checklist, respectively. Based on a comparison of export price to normal value, calculated in accordance with section 773(a)(1) of the Act, the revised estimated dumping margin for uncovered innerspring units from South Africa is 121.39 percent. See South Africa Initiation Checklist. Initiation of Antidumping Investigations Based upon the examination of the Petitions on uncovered innerspring units from the PRC, South Africa, and Vietnam, the Department finds that the Petitions meet the requirements of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating antidumping duty investigations to determine whether imports of uncovered innerspring units from the PRC, South Africa, and Vietnam are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value. In accordance with section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Act, unless postponed, we will make our preliminary determinations no later than 140 days after the date of this initiation. Separate Rates In order to obtain separate-rate status in NME investigations, exporters and producers must submit a separate-rate status application. See, *e.g.* , Policy Bulletin 05.1: Separate-Rates Practice and Application of Combination Rates in Antidumping Investigations Involving Non-Market Economy Countries (April 5, 2005) (Separate Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin), available on the Department's Web site at *http://ia.ita.doc.gov/policy/bull05-1.pdf.* Based on our experience in processing the separate-rate applications in previous NME antidumping duty investigations, we have modified the application for the NME investigations to make it more administrable and easier for applicants to complete. See, *e.g.* , *Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation: Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires From the People's Republic of China* , 72 FR 43591, 43594-95 (August 6, 2007). The specific requirements for submitting the separate-rate application in the NME investigations are outlined in detail in the application itself, which will be available on the Department's Web site at *http://ia.ita.doc.gov/ia-highlights-and-news.html* on the date of publication of this initiation notice in the **Federal Register** . The separate-rate application will be due 60 days after publication of this initiation notice. Selection of Respondents For these investigations, the Department intends to select respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP)data for U.S. imports during the POI. We intend to make our decisions regarding respondent selection within 20 days of publication of this **Federal Register** notice. The Department invites comments regarding the CBP data and the selection of respondents within seven days of publication of this **Federal Register** notice. Use of Combination Rates in an NME Investigation The Department will calculate combination rates for certain respondents that are eligible for a separate rate in the NME investigations. For example, the Separate Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin, at page 6, states: {w}hile continuing the practice of assigning separate rates only to exporters, all separate rates that the Department will now assign in its NME investigations will be specific to those producers that supplied the exporter during the period of investigation. Note, however, that one rate is calculated for the exporter and all of the producers which supplied subject merchandise to it during the period of investigation. This practice applies both to mandatory respondents receiving an individually calculated separate rate as well as the pool of non-investigated firms receiving the weighted-average of the individually calculated rates. This practice is referred to as the application of “combination rates” because such rates apply to specific combinations of exporters and one or more producers. The cash-deposit rate assigned to an exporter will apply only to merchandise both exported by the firm in question *and* produced by a firm that supplied the exporter during the period of investigation. (Emphasis added.) Distribution of Copies of the Petitions In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.202(f), copies of the public versions of the Petitions have been provided to the representatives of the Governments of the PRC, South Africa, and Vietnam. We will attempt to provide a copy of the public version of the Petitions to the foreign producers/exporters, consistent with 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2). International Trade Commission Notification We have notified the ITC of our initiations, as required by section 732(d) of the Act. Preliminary Determinations by the International Trade Commission The ITC will preliminarily determine, no later than February 14, 2008, whether there is a reasonable indication that imports of uncovered innerspring units from the PRC, South Africa, and Vietnam are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, a U.S. industry. A negative ITC determination with respect to any country will result in the investigation being terminated for that country; otherwise, these investigations will proceed according to statutory and regulatory time limits. This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 777(i) of the Act. Dated: January 22, 2008. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E8-1438 Filed 1-25-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-851] Certain Preserved Mushrooms From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. EFFECTIVE DATE: January 28, 2008. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (“the Department”) is currently conducting a new shipper review of the antidumping duty order on certain preserved mushrooms from the People's Republic of China (“PRC”) covering the period February 1, 2006, through January 31, 2007. We preliminarily determine that the sale made by Ayecue International SLU (“Ayecue International”) of subject merchandise produced by Ayecue (Liaocheng) Foodstuff Co., Ltd. (“Ayecue (Liaocheng)”) (collectively, “Ayecue”) was not made below normal value (“NV”). If these preliminary results are adopted in our final results of this review, we will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) to assess antidumping duties on entries of subject merchandise during the period of review (“POR”) for any importer- specific assessment rates that are above *de minimis* . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Martin at
(202)482-3936; AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On February 19, 1999, the Department published in the **Federal Register** an amended final determination and antidumping duty order on certain preserved mushrooms from the PRC. *See Notice of Amendment of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty Order: Certain Preserved Mushrooms From the People's Republic of China* , 64 FR 8308 (February 19, 1999) (“ *Order* ”). On February 20, 2007, we received a timely new shipper review request in accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”), and 19 CFR 351.214(c), from an exporter and producer, Ayecue. On April 2, 2007, the Department published a notice in the **Federal Register** initiating a new shipper review for Ayecue. *See Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the People's Republic of China: Initiation of New Shipper Antidumping Duty Review* , 72 FR 15657 (April 2, 2007) (“ *Initiation Notice* ”). On September 12, 2007, the Department published a notice in the **Federal Register** of the extension of the preliminary results by 120 days to January 22, 2008. *See Certain Preserved Mushrooms From the People's Republic of China: Extension of Preliminary Results for Eleventh Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review* , 72 FR 52078 (September 12, 2007). We issued the general antidumping duty questionnaire, along with the standard importer questionnaire for new shipper reviews on April 6, 2007, and received responses in May 2007. We issued supplemental questionnaires from June through November 2007, and received timely responses to those questionnaires. Period of Review The POR covers February 1, 2006, through January 31, 2007. Scope of the Order The products covered by this order are certain preserved mushrooms, whether imported whole, sliced, diced, or as stems and pieces. The certain preserved mushrooms covered under this order are the species Agaricus bisporus and Agaricus bitorquis. “Certain Preserved Mushrooms” refers to mushrooms that have been prepared or preserved by cleaning, blanching, and sometimes slicing or cutting. These mushrooms are then packed and heated in containers including, but not limited to, cans or glass jars in a suitable liquid medium, including, but not limited to, water, brine, butter or butter sauce. Certain preserved mushrooms may be imported whole, sliced, diced, or as stems and pieces. Included within the scope of this order are “brined” mushrooms, which are presalted and packed in a heavy salt solution to provisionally preserve them for further processing. 1 1 On June 19, 2000, the Department affirmed that “marinated,” “acidified,” or “pickled” mushrooms containing less than 0.5 percent acetic acid are within the scope of the antidumping duty order. *See* “Recommendation Memorandum-Final Ruling of Request by Tak Fat, *et al.* for Exclusion of Certain Marinated, Acidified Mushrooms from the Scope of the Antidumping Duty Order on Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the People's Republic of China,” dated June 19, 2000. On February 9, 2005, this decision was upheld by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”). *See Tak Fat* v. *United States* , 396 F.3d 1378 (Fed. Cir. 2005). Excluded from the scope of this order are the following:
(1)All other species of mushroom, including straw mushrooms;
(2)all fresh and chilled mushrooms, including “refrigerated” or “quick blanched mushrooms”
(3)dried mushrooms;
(4)frozen mushrooms; and
(5)“marinated,” “acidified,” or “pickled” mushrooms, which are prepared or preserved by means of vinegar or acetic acid, but may contain oil or other additives. The merchandise subject to this order is classifiable under subheadings: 2003.10.0127, 2003.10.0131, 2003.10.0137, 2003.10.0143, 2003.10.0147, 2003.10.0153 and 0711.51.0000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”). Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and Customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this order is dispositive. Affiliation and Determination of Respondent Based on the evidence on the record of this new shipper review, we preliminarily find that Ayecue (Liaocheng) and Ayecue International are affiliated pursuant to section 771(33)(E) of the Act. Moreover, even though the Department initiated this review with respect to Ayecue (Liaocheng), the Department's review of the record evidence demonstrates that its parent company, Ayecue International, is the true respondent in this segment of the proceeding. This decision is based on the fact that Ayecue International conducted all sales-related activities with respect to the shipment made by Ayecue (Liaocheng) of the merchandise under review to an unaffiliated U.S. customer. Due to the proprietary nature of this issue, for a detailed discussion of our analysis, *see* Memorandum to the File from Thomas Martin, International Trade Compliance Analyst, AD/CVD Operations, to Abdelali Elouaradia, Director, AD/CVD Operations, “Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the People's Republic of China: Affiliation of Ayecue (Liaocheng) Foodstuff Co., Ltd., and Ayecue International SLU, and Treatment of Sales, “ dated concurrently with this notice (“Ayecue Affiliation and Treatment of Sales Memorandum”). Bona Fide Analysis Consistent with the Department's practice, we investigated the *bona fide* nature of the sale made by Ayecue International for this new shipper review. In evaluating whether or not a single sale in a new shipper review is commercially reasonable, and therefore *bona fide* , the Department considers, *inter alia* , such factors as:
(1)The timing of the sale;
(2)the price and quantity;
(3)the expenses arising from the transaction;
(4)whether the goods were resold at a profit; and
(5)whether the transaction was made on an arm's-length basis. *See Tianjin Tiancheng Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.* v. *United States* , 366 F. Supp. 2d 1246, 1250 (CIT 2005). Accordingly, the Department considers a number of factors in its *bona fide* analysis, “all of which may speak to the commercial realities surrounding an alleged sale of subject merchandise.” *See Hebei New Donghua Amino Acid Co., Ltd.* v. *United States* , 374 F. Supp. 2d 1333, 1342 (CIT 2005) ( *citing Fresh Garlic From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Administrative Review and Rescission of New Shipper Review* , 67 FR 11283 (March 13, 2002) and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum). We preliminarily found that the U.S. sale made by Ayecue International during the POR was made on a *bona fide* basis. Specifically, we found that:
(1)The timing of the sale does not indicate that the sale might not be *bona fide* ;
(2)the price and quantity of the sale were within the range of the prices and quantities of other entries of subject merchandise from the PRC into the United States during the POR, based upon the Department's review of data obtained from CBP;
(3)Ayecue International and its customer did not incur any extraordinary expenses arising from the transaction;
(4)the sale was resold at a profit; and
(5)the sale was made between unaffiliated parties at arm's-length. 2 2 *See* Memorandum from Thomas Martin, International Trade Compliance Analyst, to Abdelali Elouaradia, Director, Office 4, “ *Bona Fide* Sales Analysis for Ayecue (Liaocheng) Foodstuff Co., Ltd. and Ayecue International SLU,” dated concurrently with this notice. Based on our review of the record evidence concerning the *bona fide* nature of this sale, as well as Ayecue International's eligibility for a separate rate ( *see* “Separate Rates Determination” section, below) and the Department's determination that the seller was not affiliated with any exporter or producer that had previously shipped subject merchandise to the United States, we preliminarily determine that Ayecue International has met the requirements to qualify as a new shipper during the POR. Therefore, for purposes of these preliminary results, we are treating the sale of subject merchandise to the United States as an appropriate transaction for this new shipper review. NME Country Status In every case conducted by the Department involving the PRC, the PRC has been treated as a non-market economy (“NME”) country. *See Brake Rotors From the People's Republic of China: Final Results and Partial Rescission of the 2004/2005 Administrative Review and Notice of Rescission of 2004/2005 New Shipper Review,* 71 FR 66304 (November 14, 2006). In accordance with section 771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, any determination that a foreign country is an NME country shall remain in effect until revoked by the administering authority. None of the parties to this proceeding have contested such treatment. Accordingly, we calculated NV in accordance with section 773(c) of the Act, which applies to NME countries. Separate Rates Determination A designation of a country as an NME remains in effect until it is revoked by the Department. *See* section 771(18)(C) of the Act. Accordingly, there is a rebuttable presumption that all companies within the PRC are subject to government control and, thus, should be assessed a single antidumping duty rate. It is the Department's standard policy to assign all exporters of the merchandise subject to review in NME countries a single rate unless an exporter can affirmatively demonstrate an absence of government control, both in law ( *de jure* ) and in fact ( *de facto* ), with respect to exports. To establish whether a company is sufficiently independent to be entitled to a separate, company-specific rate, the Department analyzes each exporting entity in an NME country under the test established in the *Final Determination of Sales at Less than Fair Value: Sparklers from the People's Republic of China,* 56 FR 20588 (May 6, 1991), as amplified by the *Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Silicon Carbide from the People's Republic of China,* 59 FR 22585 (May 2, 1994). As discussed in detail in the Ayecue Affiliation and Treatment of Sales Memorandum, the Department has preliminarily determined that Ayecue (Liaocheng) should not be considered the respondent in this new shipper review. Since Ayecue (Liaocheng) did not have a sale of its own during the POR, we are not making a separate rate determination for Ayecue (Liaocheng). 3 However, we have preliminarily granted Ayecue International its own rate because it is a company located in a market economy country, Spain. This decision is consistent with the Department's practice of granting a separate rate when the seller is located in a market economy country. *See Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination: Certain Activated Carbon From the People's Republic of China,* 71 FR 59721 (October 11, 2006), unchanged in *Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Activated Carbon from the People's Republic of China,* 72 FR 9508 (March 2, 2007); and *Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Silicomanganese From Kazakhstan,* 66 FR 56639, 56641 (November 9, 2001), unchanged in *Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Silicomanganese From Kazakhstan,* 67 FR 15535 (April 2, 2002). Therefore, the Department calculated a company-specific dumping margin for Ayecue International. 3 The Department notes that although Ayecue (Liaocheng) submitted a separate rate application and complete information in its Section A questionnaire response, the record evidence demonstrates that Ayecue International was the seller of the merchandise. *See* Ayecue Affiliation and Treatment of Sales Memorandum. Surrogate Country When the Department investigates imports from an NME country, section 773(c)(1) of the Act directs it to base NV, in most circumstances, on the NME producer's factors of production (“FOPs”), valued in a surrogate market-economy country or countries considered to be appropriate by the Department. In accordance with section 773(c)(4) of the Act, in valuing the FOPs, the Department shall utilize, to the extent possible, the prices or costs of FOPs in one or more market-economy countries that are at a level of economic development comparable to that of the NME country and are significant producers of comparable merchandise. The sources of the surrogate values we have used in this investigation are discussed under the “Normal Value” section, below. On July 12, 2007, the Department determined that India, Sri Lanka, Indonesia, the Philippines, and Egypt are countries comparable to the PRC in terms of economic development, and requested comments from interested parties on selecting the appropriate surrogate country for this review. *See* Letter to All Interested Parties, “New Shipper Review of Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the People's Republic of China: Ayecue (Liaocheng) Foodstuff Co., Ltd., and Ayecue International SLU,” dated July 12, 2007. No party submitted surrogate country selection comments. On August 20, 2007, the Department examined the export levels 4 of subject merchandise from the above-mentioned countries and found that India and Indonesia are significant producers of comparable merchandise. *See* Memorandum from Thomas Martin, International Trade Compliance Analyst, to Abdelali Elouaradia, Director, “Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review of Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the People's Republic of China: Selection of a Surrogate Country,” dated August 20, 2007 (“Surrogate Country Memorandum”), at 4. In selecting the appropriate surrogate country, the Department examines the availability and reliability of data from the countries deemed to be economically comparable and significant producers of subject merchandise. For a description of our practice, *see* Department Policy Bulletin No. 04.1: Non-Market Economy Surrogate Country Selection Process (March 1, 2004). In this case, we found that India has publicly available and reliable data that is more contemporaneous with the POR than is Indonesia's data. *See* Surrogate Country Memorandum at 4-5. Therefore, since India is a significant producer of comparable merchandise, is at a similar level of economic development, and has publicly available and reliable data contemporaneous with the POR, the Department selected India as the surrogate country, pursuant to section 773(c)(4) of the Act. *See* Surrogate Country Memorandum at 5. 4 The Department was unable to find world production data for subject merchandise and relied on export data as a substitute for overall production. Fair Value Comparisons To determine whether Ayecue's sale of subject merchandise to the United States was made at a price below NV, we compared its U.S. price to NV, as described in the “U.S. Price” and “Normal Value” sections of this notice, below. U.S. Price In accordance with section 772(a) of the Act, we based U.S. price on the export price (“EP”) of the sale to the United States by Ayecue International because the first sale to an unaffiliated party was made before the date of importation and the use of constructed export price (“CEP”) was not otherwise warranted. We calculated EP based on the free-on-board price to the first unaffiliated purchaser in the United States. For this EP sale, we deducted foreign inland freight and foreign brokerage and handling from the starting price (or gross unit price), in accordance with section 772(c) of the Act. For Ayecue International's U.S. sale, each of these services was either provided by an NME vendor or paid for using an NME currency. Thus, we based the deduction of these movement charges on surrogate values. We valued foreign inland freight with the surrogate value for truck freight, which we obtained from www.infreight.com. This source provides daily rates per truck load from six major points of origin to five different destinations in India. *See* Memorandum from Thomas Martin, International Trade Compliance Analyst, to the File, “New Shipper Review of Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the People's Republic of China: Surrogate Values for the Preliminary Results,” dated concurrently with this notice (“Surrogate Values Memorandum”), at Exhibit 8. We valued foreign brokerage and handling with the publicly summarized brokerage and handling expense reported by an Indian mushroom processor, Agro Dutch Industries, Ltd. (“Agro Dutch”), in the 2004-2005 administrative review of Certain Preserved Mushrooms from India. *Id.* at Exhibit 9. Normal Value 1. Methodology Section 773(c)(1)(B) of the Act provides that the Department shall determine the NV using an FOP methodology if the merchandise is exported from an NME and the information does not permit the calculation of NV using home-market prices, third-country prices, or constructed value under section 773(a) of the Act. The Department bases NV on FOPs because the presence of government controls on various aspects of NMEs renders price comparisons and the calculation of production costs invalid under the Department's normal methodologies. *See Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished or Unfinished, From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Notice of Intent to Rescind in Part,* 70 FR 39744 (July 11, 2005), unchanged in *Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished and Unfinished, from the People's Republic of China: Final Results of 2003-2004 Administrative Review and Partial Rescission of Review,* 71 FR 2517 (January 17, 2006). We calculated NV by adding together the value of the FOPs, general expenses, profit, and packing costs. The FOPs for subject merchandise include:
(1)Quantities of raw materials employed;
(2)hours of labor required;
(3)amounts of energy and other utilities consumed;
(4)representative capital and selling costs; and
(5)packing materials. We used the FOPs reported by Ayecue for materials, energy, labor, and packing, and valued those FOPs by multiplying the amount of the factor consumed in producing subject merchandise by the average unit surrogate value of the factor. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.408(c)(1), when a producer sources an input from a market-economy country and pays for it in a market-economy currency, the Department will normally value the FOP using the actual price paid for the input. *See* 19 CFR 351.408(c)(1); *see also Lasko Metal Products* v. *United States,* 43 F.3d 1442, 1445-1446 (Fed. Cir. 1994) (affirming the Department's use of market-based prices to value certain FOPs). The Department has instituted a rebuttable presumption that market economy input prices are the best available information for valuing an input when the total volume of the input purchased from all market economy sources during the period of investigation or review is 33 percent or greater of the total volume of the input purchased from all sources during the period. In these cases, unless case-specific facts provide adequate grounds to rebut the Department's presumption, the Department will use the weighted-average market economy purchase price to value the input. Alternatively, when the volume of an NME firm's purchases of an input from market economy suppliers during the period is below 33 percent of its total volume of purchases of the input during the period, but where these purchases are otherwise valid and there is no reason to disregard the prices, the Department will weight-average the weighted-average market economy purchase price with an appropriate surrogate value according to their respective shares of the total volume of purchases, unless case-specific facts provide adequate grounds to rebut the presumption. When a firm has made market economy input purchases that may have been dumped or subsidized, are not *bona fide,* or are otherwise not acceptable for use in a dumping calculation, the Department will exclude them from the numerator of the ratio to ensure a fair determination of whether valid market economy purchases meet the 33 percent threshold. *See Antidumping Methodologies: Market Economy Inputs, Expected Non-Market Economy Wages, Duty Drawback; and Request for Comments,* 71 FR 61716 (October 19, 2006). In this case, Ayecue reported that it did not purchase any inputs from market economy sources. In addition, we added freight costs to the surrogate costs that we calculated for material inputs. We calculated freight costs by multiplying surrogate freight rates by the shorter of the reported distance from the domestic supplier to the factory that produced the subject merchandise or the distance from the nearest seaport to the factory that produced the subject merchandise, as appropriate. Where there were multiple domestic suppliers of a material input, we calculated a weighted-average distance after limiting each supplier's distance to no more than the distance from the nearest seaport to Ayecue (Liaocheng). This adjustment is in accordance with the decision by the CAFC in *Sigma Corp.* v. *United States,* 117 F.3d 1401, 1407-1408 (Fed. Cir. 1997). We increased the calculated costs of the FOPs for surrogate general expenses and profit. *See* Surrogate Value Memorandum. 2. Selection of Surrogate Values In selecting surrogate values, we followed, to the extent practicable, the Department's practice of choosing public values which are non-export averages, representative of a range of prices in effect during the POR, or over a period as close as possible in time to the POR, product-specific, and tax-exclusive. * See, e.g., Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, Negative Preliminary Determination of Critical Circumstances and Postponement of Final Determination: Certain Frozen and Canned Warmwater Shrimp From the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, * 69 FR 42672, 42682 (July 16, 2004), unchanged in *Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Frozen and Canned Warmwater Shrimp From the Socialist Republic of Vietnam,* 69 FR 71005 (December 8, 2004). We also considered the quality of the source of surrogate information in selecting surrogate values. *See Manganese Metal From the People's Republic of China; Final Results and Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,* 63 FR 12440 (March 13, 1998). Where we could only obtain surrogate values that were not contemporaneous with the POR, we inflated (or deflated) the surrogate values using, where appropriate, the Indian Wholesale Price Index (“WPI”) as published in *International Financial Statistics* by the International Monetary Fund. *See* Factor Value Memorandum. In calculating surrogate values from import statistics, in accordance with the Department's practice, we disregarded statistics for imports from NME countries and countries deemed to maintain broadly available, non-industry-specific subsidies which may benefit all exporters to all export markets ( *e.g.* , Indonesia, South Korea, and Thailand). *See, e.g., Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Automotive Replacement Glass Windshields From The People's Republic of China,* 67 FR 6482 (February 12, 2002) and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 1. *See also Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, Postponement of Final Determination, and Affirmative Preliminary Determination of Critical Circumstances: Certain Color Television Receivers From the People's Republic of China,* 68 FR 66800, 66808 (November 28, 2003), unchanged in *Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Negative Final Determination of Critical Circumstances: Certain Color Television Receivers From the People's Republic of China,* 69 FR 20594 (April 16, 2004). Additionally, we excluded from our calculations imports that were labeled as originating from an unspecified country because we could not determine whether they were from an NME country. To value the fresh mushroom input, the Department used data from the fiscal year 2005-2006 financial statement of Agro Dutch. *See* Surrogate Values Memorandum, at Exhibit 3. We valued other raw material inputs (salt, citric acid, vitamin C, tin cans and tin lids) using weighted-average Indian import values derived from the World Trade Atlas online (“WTA”), for the period February 2006 through January 2007. *See* Surrogate Values Memorandum. In addition, we valued packing inputs (cartons, labels, tape, and glue) with weighted-average Indian import values derived from the WTA. The Indian import statistics obtained from the WTA were published by the Indian Directorate General of Commercial Intelligence and Statistics, Ministry of Commerce of India and are contemporaneous with the POR. As the Indian surrogate values were denominated in rupees, in accordance with 773A(a) of the Act, they were converted to U.S. dollars using the official exchange rate for India recorded on the date of sale of subject merchandise in this case. *See http://www.ia.ita.doc.gov/exchange/index.html.* To value electricity, the Department used the 2000 electricity price in India reported in *Energy Prices & Taxes, Second Quarter 2003,* published by the International Energy Agency. *See* Surrogate Values Memorandum at Exhibit 5, containing information obtained from data.iea.org. Since the electricity rates were not contemporaneous with the POR, the Department adjusted the value for inflation. *Id.* at Exhibit 5. To value natural gas, the Department used information from the Natural Gas Authority of India, from February 2005. Because the information was not contemporaneous with the POR, we adjusted the average cost of natural gas for inflation. *See* Surrogate Values Memorandum, at Exhibit 6. To value water, the Department used data from the Maharastra Industrial Development Corporation ( *www.midcindia.org* ) for June 2003, which it found to be the best available information since it includes a wide range of industrial water rates. Since the water rates were not contemporaneous with the POR, the Department adjusted the value for inflation. *See* Surrogate Values Memorandum, at Exhibit 7. To value inland freight expenses incurred for transporting raw materials and finished subject merchandise, we used data from *www.infreight.com.* This source provides daily rates per truck load from six major points of origin to five different destinations in India, from February through July 2005. Since these freight rates are not contemporaneous with the POR, the Department adjusted the value for inflation. *See* Surrogate Values Memorandum, at Exhibit 8. 19 CFR 351.408(c)(3) requires the use of a regression-based wage rate. Therefore, to value labor, the Department used the regression-based wage rate for the PRC published on the Import Administration Web site. *See http://ia.ita.doc.gov/wages/04wages/04wages-010907.html* . To value brokerage and handling, the Department used the publicly summarized average brokerage and handling expenses reported in the U.S. sales listings of Agro Dutch's May 24, 2005, submission in the sixth antidumping duty review of certain preserved mushrooms from India. *See* Surrogate Values Memorandum, at Exhibit 9. To value the surrogate financial ratios for factory overhead (“OH”), selling, general & administrative (“SG&A”) expenses, and profit, the Department used the 2005-2006 (April 2005 through March 2006) financial statements of Agro Dutch and Flex Foods Ltd. (“Flex Foods”). 5 The Department notes that Agro Dutch is a processor of mushrooms, and Flex Foods is an Indian producer of mushrooms and vegetable products. Therefore, Agro Dutch's and Flex Foods' financial ratios for OH and SG&A are comparable to Ayecue (Liaocheng)'s financial ratios because Agro Dutch's and Flex Foods' production experience is comparable to Ayecue (Liaocheng)'s production experience. Additionally, the financial statements of these two companies are contemporaneous for two months of the POR. Moreover, an average of the financial statements of Agro Dutch and Flex Foods represents a broader spectrum of the Indian mushroom industry, than the financial statement of a single mushroom producer. *See* Surrogate Values Memorandum, at Exhibit 10. 5 Both Agro Dutch and Flex Foods have a fiscal year of April to March. Currency Conversion We made currency conversions into U.S. dollars, in accordance with section 773A(a) of the Act, based on the exchange rates in effect on the dates of the U.S. sales as certified by the Federal Reserve Bank. These exchange rates can be accessed at the Web site of Import Administration at *http://ia.ita.doc.gov/exchange/index.html.* Combination Rate In new shipper reviews, where subject merchandise is exported to the United States by a company that is not the producer of the merchandise, the Department may, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.107(b), establish a combination cash deposit rate for each combination of the exporter and its supplying producer(s). *See Fresh Garlic From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review,* 67 FR 72139 at 72140 (December 4, 2002), *Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review: Certain In-Shell Raw Pistachios From Iran,* 68 FR 353 at 354 (January 3, 2003), and *Certain Forged Stainless Steel Flanges From India: Final Results of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review,* 68 FR 351 (January 3, 2002). The Department has preliminarily determined that a combination rate is appropriate in this case, as Ayecue International is not the producer of the subject merchandise. Therefore, the Department will include in its cash deposit instructions to CBP appropriate language to enforce the final results of this review on the basis of a combination rate involving Ayecue International and Ayecue (Liaocheng). Preliminary Results of Review We preliminarily determine that the following margin exists during the period February 1, 2006, through January 31, 2007: Exporter Manufacturer Weighted-average margin (percentage) Ayecue International SLU Ayecue (Liaocheng) Foodstuff Co., Ltd. 0.00 Public Comment The Department will disclose to parties to this proceeding the calculations performed in reaching the preliminary results within five days after the date of publication of these preliminary results. Interested parties may submit written comments (case briefs) within 30 days of publication of the preliminary results and rebuttal comments (rebuttal briefs), which must be limited to issues raised in the case briefs, within five days after the time limit for filing case briefs. *See* 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(ii) and 19 CFR 351.309(d). Parties who submit arguments are requested to submit with the argument:
(1)A statement of the issue;
(2)a brief summary of the argument; and
(3)a table of authorities. Further, the Department requests that parties submitting written comments provide the Department with a diskette containing the public version of those comments. Any interested party may request a hearing within 30 days of publication of this notice. *See* 19 CFR 351.310(c). Interested parties who wish to request a hearing or to participate if one is requested, must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Import Administration within 30 days of the date of publication of this notice. Requests should contain:
(1)The party's name, address, and telephone number;
(2)the number of participants; and
(3)a list of issues to be discussed. *See* 19 CFR 351.310(c). Issues raised in the hearing will be limited to those raised in the briefs. Unless the deadline is extended pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B)(iv) of the Act, the Department will issue the final results of this new shipper review, including the results of our analysis of the issues raised by the parties in their comments, within 90 days of publication of these preliminary results. Assessment Rates Upon issuing the final results of the review, the Department shall determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of the final results of review. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we will calculate importer-specific *ad valorem* duty assessment rates based on the ratio of the total amount of the dumping margins calculated for the examined sales to the total entered value of those same sales. We will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review if any importer-specific assessment rate calculated in the final results of this review is above *de minimis* . However, the final results of this review shall be the basis for the assessment of antidumping duties on entries of merchandise covered by the final results of these reviews and for future deposits of estimated duties, where applicable. Cash Deposit Requirements The following cash deposit requirements, when imposed, will be effective upon publication of the final results of this new shipper review for all shipments of subject merchandise exported by Ayecue International and produced by Ayecue (Liaocheng) entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act:
(1)For subject merchandise exported by Ayecue International and produced by Ayecue (Liaocheng), the cash-deposit rate will be that established in the final results of this review;
(2)for subject merchandise exported by Ayecue International but not manufactured by Ayecue (Liaocheng), the cash deposit rate will continue to be the PRC-wide rate ( *i.e.* , 198.63 percent); and
(3)for subject merchandise manufactured by Ayecue (Liaocheng) but exported by any party other than Ayecue International, the cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the exporter. If the cash deposit rate calculated for Ayecue International in the final results is zero or *de minimis* , no cash deposit will be required for entries of subject merchandise exported by Ayecue International and produced by Ayecue (Liaocheng). These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice. Notification to Importers This notice serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties. This new shipper review and notice are in accordance with sections 751(a)(2)(B) and 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214(h)(i). Dated: January 18, 2008. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E8-1444 Filed 1-25-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-533-808] Stainless Steel Wire Rods From India: Final Results of Antidumping Duty New-Shipper Review AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On October 26, 2007, the Department of Commerce published the preliminary results of a new-shipper review of the antidumping duty order on stainless steel wire rods from India. The stainless steel wire rods (wire rods) were produced and exported by Sunflag Iron & Steel Co., Ltd. (Sunflag). The period of review
(POR)is December 1, 2005, through November 30, 2006. Based on our analysis of comments received, we have not made any changes to our decision to apply adverse facts available to Sunflag's U.S. sales. Therefore, our final results are identical to our preliminary results. The final results are listed below in the section entitled “Final Results of the New-Shipper Review”. EFFECTIVE DATE: January 28, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Catherine Cartsos or Minoo Hatten, AD/CVD Operations, Office 5, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone:
(202)482-1757 and
(202)482-1690, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On October 26, 2007, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published the preliminary results of the new-shipper review of the antidumping duty order on stainless steel wire rods from India. See *Stainless Steel Wire Rods from India: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty New-Shipper Review,* 72 FR 60808 (October 26, 2007). We invited interested parties to comment on the preliminary results. Sunflag filed a case brief on November 26, 2007. Domestic interested parties, Carpenter Technology Corp., North American Stainless, and Universal Stainless & Alloy Products, Inc., filed a rebuttal brief on November 27, 2007. Scope of the Order The merchandise under review is wire rods, which are hot-rolled or hot-rolled annealed and/or pickled rounds, squares, octagons, hexagons or other shapes, in coils. Wire rods are made of alloy steels containing, by weight, 1.2 percent or less of carbon and 10.5 percent or more of chromium, with or without other elements. These products are only manufactured by hot-rolling and are normally sold in coiled form, and are of solid cross section. The majority of wire rods sold in the United States are round in cross-section shape, annealed, and pickled. The most common size is 5.5 millimeters in diameter. The wire rods subject to this order are currently classifiable under subheadings 7221.00.0005, 7221.00.0015, 7221.00.0030, 7221.00.0045, and 7221.00.0075 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise subject to the order is dispositive of whether the merchandise is covered by the order. Analysis of Comments Received All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to this new-shipper review are addressed in the “Issues and Decision Memorandum” (Decision Memorandum) from Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, to David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, dated January 17, 2008, which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues which the parties have raised and to which we have responded is attached to this notice as an appendix. Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised and corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum, which is on file in Import Administration's Central Records Unit, Room B-099 of the main Department building. In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memorandum is available on the Internet at *http://iaita.doc.gov/frn/index.html.* The paper copy and electronic version of the Decision Memorandum are identical in content. No Changes Since the Preliminary Results Based on our analysis of the comments received, the Department has made no changes in the final results from the preliminary results of new-shipper review and confirms its decision to apply adverse facts available to Sunflag's U.S. sales. Accordingly, as a result of our review we determine that a dumping margin of 48.80 percent exists for Sunflag for the period December 1, 2005, through November 30, 2006. Final Results of the New-Shipper Review We determine that the adverse facts-available margin on stainless steel wire rods from India produced and exported by Sunflag for the period December 1, 2005, through November 30, 2006, is 48.80 percent. Assessment Rates The Department will determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP)shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. Because we are relying on total adverse facts available to establish Sunflag's dumping margin, we will instruct CBP to apply a dumping margin of 48.80 percent to all entries of subject merchandise during the POR that were produced and exported by Sunflag. We intend to issue appropriate assessment instructions directly to CBP 15 days after the publication of these final results of the new-shipper review. Cash-Deposit Requirements The following deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of this notice of final results of the new-shipper review for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication, consistent with section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act):
(1)The cash-deposit rate for stainless steel wire rods that were produced and exported by Sunflag will be 48.80 percent;
(2)for previously reviewed or investigated companies not listed above, the cash-deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recent period;
(3)if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the original less-than-fair-value investigation, but the manufacturer is, the cash-deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and
(4)the cash-deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be the all-others rate of 48.80 percent, which is the all-others rate established in the less-than-fair-value investigation. See *Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Stainless Steel Wire Rods from India,* 58 FR 54110 (October 20, 1993). These cash-deposit rates shall remain in effect until further notice. Notification to Importers This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties. Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Orders This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to an administrative protective order of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under such an order in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely notification of the return or destruction of administrative-protective-order materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the terms of an administrative protective order is a sanctionable violation. We are issuing and publishing this notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(2)(B) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: January 17, 2008. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. Appendix Comment 1: Errors in Home-Market Sales Comment 2: Incomplete Home-Market Sales Comment 3: Miscellaneous Errors Comment 4: Ill-Preparedness for Verification [FR Doc. E8-1443 Filed 1-25-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Request for Revocation in Part AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) has received requests to conduct administrative reviews of various antidumping and countervailing duty orders and findings with December anniversary dates. In accordance with our regulations, we are initiating those administrative reviews. The Department also received a request to revoke one antidumping duty order in part. EFFECTIVE DATE: January 28, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sheila E. Forbes, Office of AD/CVD Operations, Customs Unit, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230, telephone:
(202)482-4737. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The Department has received timely requests, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(b)(2004), for administrative reviews of various antidumping and countervailing duty orders and findings with December anniversary dates. The Department also received a timely request to revoke in part the antidumping duty order on Honey from Argentina with respect to one exporter. Initiation of Reviews In accordance with section 19 CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i), we are initiating administrative reviews of the following antidumping and countervailing duty orders and findings. We intend to issue the final results of these reviews not later than December 31, 2008. Period to be reviewed Antidumping Duty Proceedings Argentina: Honey, A-357-812 12/01/06-11/30/07 AGLH S.A. Algodonera Avellaneda S.A. Asociacion de Cooperativas Argentinas. Bomare S.A. (Bodegas Miguel Armengol). Compania Apicola Argentina S.A. Compania Inversora Platense S.A. El Mana S.A. HoneyMax S.A. Mercoline S.A. Mielar S.A. Nexco S.A. Patagonik S.A. Productos Afer S.A. Seabird Argentina S.A. Seylinco, S.A. India: Carbazole Violet Pigment 23, A-533-838 12/1/06-11/30/07 Alpanil Industries Limited. Pidilite Industries Limited. Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products, A-533-820 12/1/06-11/30/07 Essar Steel Limited. Ispat Industries Limited. JSW Steel Limited. Tata Steel Limited. South Korea: Welded ASTM A-312 Stainless Steel Pipe, A-580-810 12/1/06-11/30/07 SeAH. The People's Republic of China: Carbazole Violet Pigment 23, 1 A-570-892 12/1/06-11/30/07 Aesthetic Colortech (Shanghai) Company, Limited. Anhui Worldbest IE Company, Limited. Cidic Company, Limited. Ganguink Group, Pigment Division. Goldlink Industries Company, Limited. Hunan Sunlogistics International Company, Limited. Hygeia-Chem (Shanghai) Company, Limited. Nantong Haidi Chemical Company, Limited. Pudong Prime International Logistic Incorporated. Shanghai Rainbow Dyes Import & Export. Sinocol Corporation, Limited. Tianjin Hanchem International Trading Company, Limited. Trust Chem Company, Limited. Yancheng Tiacheng Chemical Company, Limited. Certain Cased Pencils, 2 A-570-827 12/1/06-11/30/07 Anhui Import & Export Co., Ltd. Beijing Dixon Stationery Company Ltd. China First Pencil Co., Ltd. Guangdong Provincial Stationery & Sporting Goods Import & Export Corporation. Orient International Holding Shanghai Foreign Trade Corporation. Shandong Rongxin Import & Export Co., Ltd. Shanghai Three Star Stationary Industry Co., Ltd. Tianjin Custom Wood Processing Co., Ltd. Three Star Stationery Industry Corp. Hand Trucks and Parts Thereof, 3 A-570-891 12/1/06-11/30/07 Qingdao Taifa Group Co., Ltd. True Potential Co., Ltd. New-Tec Integration (Xiamen) Co., Ltd. Since Hardware (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd. Honey, 4 A-570-863 12/1/06-11/30/07 Alfred L. Wolff (Beijing) Co., Ltd. Anhui Honghui Foodstuff (Group) Co., Ltd. Anhui Native Produce Imp & Exp Corp. Cheng Du Wai Yuan Bee Products Co., Ltd. Chengdu Stone Dynasty Art Stone. Dongtai Peak Honey Industry Co., Ltd. Eurasia Bee's Products Co., Ltd. Golden Tadco Int'l. Hangzhou Golden Harvest Health Industry Co., Ltd. Hanseatische Nahrungsmittel Fabrik R Import-Export GMBH. Haoliluck Co., Ltd. Hubei Yusun Co., Ltd. Inner Mongolia Altin Bee-Keeping. Inner Mongolia Youth Trade Development Co., Ltd. Jiangsu Kanghong Natural Healthfoods Co., Ltd. Jiangsu Light Industry Products Imp & Exp (Group) Corp. Mgl Yung Sheng Honey Co., Ltd. (also DBA Fresh Honey Co., Ltd.). Nefelon Limited Company. OEI International Inc. Qingdao Aolan Trade Co., Ltd. QHD Sanhai Honey Co., Ltd. Qinhuangdao Municipal Dafeng Industrial Co., Ltd. Shanghai Bloom International Trading Co., Ltd. Shanghai Foreign Trade Co., Ltd. Shanghai Hui Ai Mal Tose Co., Ltd. Shanghai Taiside Trading Co., Ltd. Sichuan-Dujiangyan Dubao Bee Industrial Co., Ltd. Tianjin Eulia Honey Co., Ltd. Wuhan Bee Healthy Co., Ltd. Wuhan Shino-Food Trade Co., Ltd. Wuhu Qinshi Tangye. Xinjiang Jinhui Food Co., Ltd. Malleable Cast Iron Pipe Fittings, 5 A-570-881 12/1/06-11/30/07 Beijing Sai Lin Ke Hardware Co., Ltd. Mueller Comercial de Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V. Porcelain-on-Steel Cooking Ware, 6 A-570-506 12/1/06-11/30/07 Xiamen Songson Plastic Hardware Co., Ltd. Pure Magnesium, 7 A-570-832 5/1/06—4/30/07 Tianjin Magnesium International Co., Ltd. Countervailing Duty Proceedings India: Carbazole Violet Pigment 23, C-533-839 1/1/06-12/31/06 Alpanil Industries Limited. Pidilite Industries Limited. Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products, C-533-821 1/1/07-12/31/07 Essar Steel Ltd. Ispat Industries Limited. JSW Steel Limited. Tata Steel Limited. 1 If one of the above named companies does not qualify for a separate rate, all other exporters of Carbazole Violet Pigment 23 from the People's Republic of China who have not qualified for a separate rate are deemed to be covered by this review as part of the single PRC entity of which the named exporters are a part. 2 If one of the above named companies does not qualify for a separate rate, all other exporters of Certain Cased Pencils from the People's Republic of China who have not qualified for a separate rate are deemed to be covered by this review as part of the single PRC entity of which the named exporters are a part. 3 If one of the above named companies does not qualify for a separate rate, all other exporters of Hand Trucks and Parts Thereof from the People's Republic of China who have not qualified for a separate rate are deemed to be covered by this review as part of the single PRC entity of which the named exporters are a part. 4 If one of the above named companies does not qualify for a separate rate, all other exporters of Honey from the People's Republic of China who have not qualified for a separate rate are deemed to be covered by this review as part of the single PRC entity of which the named exporters are a part. 5 If one of the above named companies does not qualify for a separate rate, all other exporters of Malleable Cast Iron Pipe Fittings from the People's Republic of China who have not qualified for a separate rate are deemed to be covered by this review as part of the single PRC entity of which the named exporters are a part. 6 If one of the above named companies does not qualify for a separate rate, all other exporters of Porcelain-on-Steel Cooking Ware from the People's Republic of China who have not qualified for a separate rate are deemed to be covered by this review as part of the single PRC entity of which the named exporters are a part. 7 On June 29, 2007, (72 FR 35693), we deferred this review for one year. However, Petitioner timely filed an objection to the deferral. Consequently, we have determined not to defer this review. Please see: Memorandum to the File: Granting Petitioner an Extension of Time to File an Objection to Respondent's Deferral Request, dated September 26, 2007. Suspension Agreements None. During any administrative review covering all or part of a period falling between the first and second or third and fourth anniversary of the publication of an antidumping duty order under section 351.211 or a determination under section 351.218(f)(4) to continue an order or suspended investigation (after sunset review), the Secretary, if requested by a domestic interested party within 30 days of the date of publication of the notice of initiation of the review, will determine, consistent with *FAG Italia* v. *United States,* 291 F.3d 806 (Fed. Cir. 2002), as appropriate, whether antidumping duties have been absorbed by an exporter or producer subject to the review if the subject merchandise is sold in the United States through an importer that is affiliated with such exporter or producer. The request must include the name(s) of the exporter or producer for which the inquiry is requested. Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under administrative protective orders in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. These initiations and this notice are in accordance with section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)), and 19 CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i). Dated: January 22, 2008. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E8-1440 Filed 1-25-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-201-820] Suspension of Antidumping Investigation: Fresh Tomatoes From Mexico AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. ACTION: Notice of suspension of antidumping investigation on fresh tomatoes from Mexico. EFFECTIVE DATE: January 22, 2008. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce has suspended the antidumping investigation involving fresh tomatoes from Mexico. The basis for the suspension of the antidumping investigation is an agreement between the Department of Commerce and producers/exporters accounting for substantially all imports of fresh tomatoes from Mexico wherein each signatory producer/exporter has agreed to revise its prices to eliminate completely the injurious effects of exports of this merchandise to the United States. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Judith Wey Rudman or Jay Carreiro at
(202)482-0192 or
(202)482-3674, respectively; Office of Policy, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street & Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Applicable Statute and Regulations Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the statute are references to the provisions effective January 1, 1995, the effective date of the amendments made to the Tariff Act of 1930 (the Act) by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act. In addition, unless otherwise indicated, all citations to Department of Commerce (Department) regulations refer to the regulations codified at 19 CFR part 353 (1996). Background On April 18, 1996, the Department initiated an antidumping investigation to determine whether imports of fresh tomatoes from Mexico are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value
(LTFV)(61 FR 18377, April 25, 1996). On May 16, 1996, the United States International Trade Commission
(ITC)notified the Department of its affirmative preliminary injury determination. On October 10, 1996, the Department and Mexican tomato growers/exporters initialed a proposed agreement suspending the antidumping investigation. On October 28, 1996, the Department preliminarily determined that imports of fresh tomatoes from Mexico are being sold at LTFV in the United States. *See Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination: Fresh Tomatoes from Mexico,* 61 FR 56608 (November 1, 1996) ( *Preliminary Determination* ). On the same day the *Preliminary Determination* was signed, the Department and certain growers/exporters of fresh tomatoes from Mexico signed an agreement to suspend the investigation (1996 Suspension Agreement). *See Suspension of Antidumping Investigation: Fresh Tomatoes from Mexico,* 61 FR 56618 (November 1, 1996). On May 31, 2002, Mexican tomato growers/exporters accounting for a significant percentage of all fresh tomatoes imported into the United States from Mexico provided written notice to the Department of their withdrawal from the 1996 Suspension Agreement, effective July 30, 2002. Because the 1996 Suspension Agreement would no longer cover substantially all imports of fresh tomatoes from Mexico, effective July 30, 2002, the Department terminated the 1996 Suspension Agreement, terminated the sunset review of the suspended investigation, and resumed the antidumping investigation. *See Notice of Termination of Suspension Agreement, Termination of Sunset Review, and Resumption of Antidumping Investigation: Fresh Tomatoes from Mexico,* 67 FR 50858 (August 6, 2002). On November 8, 2002, the Department and Mexican tomato growers/exporters initialed a proposed agreement suspending the resumed antidumping investigation on imports of fresh tomatoes from Mexico. On December 4, 2002, the Department and certain growers/exporters of fresh tomatoes from Mexico signed a new suspension agreement (“2002 Suspension Agreement”). *See Suspension of Antidumping Investigation: Fresh Tomatoes From Mexico,* 67 FR 77044 (December 16, 2002). On November 3, 2003, the Department published the *Final Results of Analysis of Reference Prices and Clarifications and Corrections; Agreement Suspending the Antidumping Duty Investigation on Fresh Tomatoes From Mexico,* 68 FR 62281 (November 3, 2003). On November 26, 2007, Mexican tomato growers/exporters accounting for a significant percentage of all fresh tomatoes imported into the United States from Mexico provided written notice to the Department of their withdrawal from the 2002 Suspension Agreement, effective 90 days from the date of their withdrawal letter ( *i.e.* , February 24, 2008), or earlier, at the Department's discretion. On November 28, 2007, the Department and Mexican tomato growers/exporters initialed a new proposed agreement to suspend the antidumping investigation on imports of fresh tomatoes from Mexico. On December 3, 2007, the Department released the initialed agreement to interested parties and afforded them an opportunity to comment on the initialed agreement. On December 17 and 18, 2007, several interested parties filed comments in support of the initialed agreement. Because the 2002 Suspension Agreement would no longer cover substantially all imports of fresh tomatoes from Mexico, the Department published a notice of intent to terminate the 2002 Suspension Agreement, intent to terminate the five-year sunset review of the suspended investigation, and intent to resume the antidumping investigation. *See Fresh Tomatoes from Mexico: Notice of Intent to Terminate Suspension Agreement, Intent to Terminate the Five-Year Sunset Review, and Intent to Resume Antidumping Investigation,* 72 FR 70820 (December 13, 2007). On January 16, 2008, the Department published a notice of termination of the 2002 Suspension Agreement, termination of the five-year sunset review of the suspended investigation, and resumption of the antidumping investigation, effective January 18, 2008. *See Fresh Tomatoes from Mexico: Notice of Termination of Suspension Agreement, Termination of Five-Year Sunset Review, and Resumption of Antidumping Investigation,* 73 FR 2887, (January 16, 2008). On January 22, 2008, the Department signed a new suspension agreement (2008 Suspension Agreement) with certain growers/exporters of fresh tomatoes from Mexico. The 2008 Suspension Agreement is attached to this notice of Suspension of Antidumping Investigation. Scope of the Agreement The merchandise subject to this Agreement is all fresh or chilled tomatoes (fresh tomatoes) which have Mexico as their origin, except for those tomatoes which are for processing. For purposes of this Agreement, processing is defined to include preserving by any commercial process, such as canning, dehydrating, drying, or the addition of chemical substances, or converting the tomato product into juices, sauces, or purees. Fresh tomatoes that are imported for cutting up, not further processing ( *e.g.* , tomatoes used in the preparation of fresh salsa or salad bars), are covered by this Agreement. Commercially grown tomatoes, both for the fresh market and for processing, are classified as Lycopersicon esculentum. Important commercial varieties of fresh tomatoes include common round, cherry, grape, plum, greenhouse, and pear tomatoes, all of which are covered by this Agreement. Tomatoes imported from Mexico covered by this Agreement are classified under the following subheadings of the Harmonized Tariff Schedules of the United States (HTSUS), according to the season of importation: 0702 and 9906.07.01 through 9906.07.09. Although the HTSUS numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this Agreement is dispositive. Suspension of Investigation The Department consulted with the parties to the proceeding and has considered the comments submitted with respect to the proposal to suspend the antidumping investigation. In accordance with section 734(c) of the Act, we have determined that extraordinary circumstances are present in this case, as defined by section 734(c)(2)(A) of the Act. See the memorandum titled “Existence of Extraordinary Circumstances” from Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and Negotiations, to David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. The 2008 Suspension Agreement provides that the subject merchandise will be sold at or above the established reference price and, for each entry of each exporter, the amount by which the estimated normal value exceeds the export price (or constructed export price) will not exceed 15 percent of the weighted-average amount by which the estimated normal value exceeded the export price (or constructed export price) for all LTFV entries of the producer/exporter examined during the course of the investigation. We have determined that the 2008 Suspension Agreement will eliminate completely the injurious effect of exports to the United States of the subject merchandise and prevent the suppression or undercutting of price levels of domestic fresh tomatoes by imports of that merchandise from Mexico. We have also determined that the 2008 Suspension Agreement is in the public interest and can be monitored effectively, as required under section 734(d) of the Act. See the memorandum titled “Public Interest Assessment of the Agreement Suspending the Antidumping Duty Investigation on Fresh Tomatoes from Mexico” from Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and Negotiations, to David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. For the reasons outlined above, we find that the 2008 Suspension Agreement meets the criteria of section 734(c) of the Act. International Trade Commission In accordance with section 734(f) of the Act, the Department has notified the ITC of the 2008 Suspension Agreement. Suspension of Liquidation The suspension of liquidation ordered in the preliminary affirmative determination in this case published on November 1, 1996, and resumed on January 18, 2008 (see 73 FR 2887), shall continue to be in effect, subject to section 734(h)(3) of the Act. Section 734(f)(2)(B) of the Act provides that the Department may adjust the security required to reflect the effect of the 2008 Suspension Agreement. The Department has found that the 2008 Suspension Agreement eliminates completely the injurious effects of imports and, thus, the Department is adjusting the security required from signatories to zero. The security rates in effect for imports from non-signatory growers remain as published in the *Preliminary Determination.* Notwithstanding the 2008 Suspension Agreement, the Department will continue the investigation if it receives such a request within 20 days after the date of publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** , in accordance with section 734(g) of the Act. Administrative Protective Order Access The Administrative Protective Orders
(APOs)the Department granted in the original investigation segment of this proceeding remain in place. While the investigation is suspended, parties subject to those APOs may retain, but may not use, information received under those APOs. All parties wishing access to business proprietary information submitted during the administration of the 2008 Suspension Agreement must submit new APO applications. An APO for the administration of the 2008 Suspension Agreement will be placed on the record within five days of the date of publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** . We are publishing this notice in accordance with section 734 of the Act and 19 CFR 353.18. Dated: January 22, 2008. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. Attachment. Suspension of Antidumping Investigation: Fresh Tomatoes From Mexico Pursuant to section 734(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1673c(c)) (“the Act”), and section 353.18 of the U.S. Department of Commerce (“the Department”) regulations (19 CFR 353.18 (1996)), the Department and the signatory producers/exporters of fresh tomatoes from Mexico enter into this Suspension Agreement (the “Agreement”). On the basis of this Agreement, the Department shall suspend its antidumping duty investigation, the initiation of which was published on April 25, 1996 (61 FR 18377), with respect to fresh tomatoes from Mexico, subject to the terms and provisions set out below. I. Product Coverage The merchandise subject to this Agreement is all fresh or chilled tomatoes (fresh tomatoes) which have Mexico as their origin, except for those tomatoes which are for processing. For purposes of this Agreement, processing is defined to include preserving by any commercial process, such as canning, dehydrating, drying, or the addition of chemical substances, or converting the tomato product into juices, sauces, or purees. In Appendix F of this Agreement the Department has outlined the procedure that signatories must follow for selling subject merchandise for processing. Fresh tomatoes that are imported for cutting up, not further processing ( *e.g.* , tomatoes used in the preparation of fresh salsa or salad bars), are covered by this Agreement. Commercially grown tomatoes, both for the fresh market and for processing, are classified as Lycopersicon esculentum. Important commercial varieties of fresh tomatoes include common round, cherry, grape, plum, greenhouse, and pear tomatoes, all of which are covered by this Agreement. Tomatoes imported from Mexico covered by this Agreement are classified under the following subheadings of the Harmonized Tariff Schedules of the United States (HTSUS), according to the season of importation: 0702 and 9906.07.01 through 9906.07.09. Although the HTSUS numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this Agreement is dispositive. II. U.S. Import Coverage The signatories are the producers and exporters in Mexico which account for substantially all of the subject merchandise imported into the United States. The Department may at any time during the period of the Agreement require additional producers/exporters in Mexico to sign the Agreement in order to ensure that not less than substantially all imports into the United States are subject to the Agreement. III. Basis for the Agreement Each signatory individually agrees that, in order to prevent price suppression or undercutting, it will not sell, on and after the effective date of the Agreement, merchandise subject to the Agreement at prices that are less than the reference price, in accordance with Appendix A to this Agreement. In order to satisfy the requirements of section 734(c)(1)(B) of the Act, each signatory agrees individually that for each entry the amount by which the estimated normal value exceeds the export price (or the constructed export price) will not exceed 15 percent of the weighted-average amount by which the estimated normal value exceeded the export price (or the constructed export price) for all less-than-fair-value entries of the producer/exporter examined during the course of the investigation, in accordance with the calculation methodologies described in Appendix B of this Agreement. IV. Monitoring of the Agreement A. Import Monitoring 1. The Department will monitor entries of fresh tomatoes from Mexico to ensure compliance with section III of this Agreement. 2. The Department will review publicly available data and other official import data, including, as appropriate, records maintained by U.S. Customs and Border Protection, to determine whether there have been imports that are inconsistent with the provisions of this Agreement. B. Compliance Monitoring 1. The Department may require, and each signatory agrees to provide, confirmation, through documentation provided to the Department, that the price received on any sale subject to this Agreement was not less than the established reference price. The Department may require that such documentation be provided, and be subject to verification, within thirty days of the sale. 2. The Department may require, and each signatory agrees to report in the prescribed format and using the prescribed method of data compilation, each sale of the merchandise subject to this Agreement, either directly or indirectly to unrelated purchasers in the United States, including each adjustment applicable to each sale, as specified by the Department. Each signatory agrees to permit review and on-site inspection of all information deemed necessary by the Department to verify the reported information. 3. The Department may conduct administrative reviews under section 751 of the Act, upon request or upon its own initiative, to ensure that exports of fresh tomatoes from Mexico are at prices consistent with the terms of this Agreement. The Department may perform verifications pursuant to administrative reviews conducted under section 751 of the Act. 4. At any time, and without prior notice, the Department may conduct verifications of parties handling signatory merchandise to determine whether they are selling signatory merchandise in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. C. Shipping and Other Arrangements 1. All reference prices will be expressed in U.S.$/lb. in accordance with Appendix A of this Agreement. Subject to paragraph 24 of Annex 703.2 of the North American Free Trade Agreement, the quality of each entry of fresh tomatoes exported to the United States from Mexico will conform with any applicable U.S. Department of Agriculture minimum grade, size, and/or quality import requirements in effect. 2. Signatories agree not to circumvent the Agreement and to undertake measures that will help to prevent circumvention. For example, each signatory will take the following actions: a. It is the responsibility of all signatories to ensure that sales of their merchandise are made consistent with the requirements of this Agreement. To that end, each signatory shall enter into a contract, with the party that is responsible for the first sale of its subject merchandise to an unaffiliated customer in the United States (the Selling Agent), 1 that incorporates the terms of this Agreement. Through a contractual arrangement signatories shall also require the Selling Agent establish a contract with third parties to ensure that adjustments for spoilage or other claims inconsistent with the Agreement will not be permitted. Further, this contractual arrangement must establish that the Selling Agent maintain documentation demonstrating that sales of their merchandise are made consistent with the requirements of this Agreement. 1 The Selling Agent can be an importer, agent, broker, distributor, or any other entity that facilitates the transaction between the signatory and the first unaffiliated U.S. customer. b. Each signatory will label its boxes of subject merchandise that are exported to the United States with its name, signatory identification number, and a statement that “These Tomatoes Were Grown/Exported By a Signatory of the 2008 Suspension Agreement.” 2 Alternatively, if the signatory that exports the tomatoes is different from the entity that grew the tomatoes, it will label the boxes with its name and its signatory identification number. 2 Signatories may continue to use boxes with markings from the 2002 Suspension Agreement through December 31, 2008. c. Each signatory will label its boxes of fresh tomatoes sold in Mexico with its name and the title “Prohibida Su Exportacion”. 3. Not later than thirty days after each quarter, each signatory will submit a written statement to the Department certifying that all sales during the most recently completed quarter were at net prices (after rebates, backbilling, discounts for quality and other claims) at or above the reference price and were not part of or related to any act or practice which would have the effect of hiding the real price of the fresh tomatoes being sold ( *e.g.* , a bundling arrangement, discounts/free goods/financing package, swap, or other exchange). Each signatory agrees to permit full verification of its certification as the Department deems necessary. D. Rejection of Submissions The Department may reject:
(1)Any information submitted after the deadlines set forth in this Agreement;
(2)any submission that does not comply with the filing, format, translation, service, and certification of documents requirements under 19 CFR 353.31;
(3)submissions that do not comply with the procedures for establishing business proprietary treatment under 19 CFR 353.32, or any information that it is unable to verify to its satisfaction. If information is not submitted in a complete and timely fashion or is not fully verifiable, the Department may use the facts otherwise available for the basis of its decision, as it determines appropriate, unless the Department determines that section V. applies. E. Compliance Consultations 1. When the Department identifies, through import or compliance monitoring or otherwise, that sales may have been made at prices inconsistent with section III of this Agreement, the Department will notify each signatory which it believes is responsible or, if applicable, notify the signatory's representative. The Department will consult with each such party for a period of up to sixty days to establish a factual basis regarding sales that may be inconsistent with section III of this Agreement. 2. During the consultation period, the Department will examine any information that it develops or which is submitted, including information requested by the Department under sections IV.A. and B. above. F. Review If the Department is not satisfied at the conclusion of the consultation period that sales by such signatory are being made in compliance with this Agreement, the Department may conduct a review to determine whether this Agreement is being violated by such signatory. This provision does not limit or restrict the Department's authority to conduct an administrative review under section 751 of the Act and paragraph IV.B.3. of this Agreement. G. Operations Consultations The Department will consult with the signatory producers/exporters regarding the operations of this Agreement. A party to the Agreement may request such consultations in any April or September ( *i.e.* , prior to the beginning of each season) following the first year of the signing of this Agreement. Consistent with the statutory requirement that the Agreement prevent the suppression or undercutting of price levels of domestic fresh tomatoes, the Department may revise the reference price following consultations under this provision. In order to evaluate whether this Agreement fulfills the requirements of section 734(c)(1)(B) of the Act, the Department may conduct an administrative review under section 751 of the Act, upon request or upon its own initiative, to ensure that for each entry of each exporter the amount by which the estimated normal value exceeds the export price (or the constructed export price) did not exceed 15 percent of the weighted-average amount by which the estimated normal value exceeded the export price (or the constructed export price) for all less-than-fair-value entries of the producer/exporter examined during the course of the investigation, in accordance with the calculation methodologies described in Appendix B. An affirmative determination under section 751 of the Act may result in the termination of this Agreement. V. Violations of the Agreement A. If the Department determines that the Agreement is being or has been violated or no longer meets the requirements of sections 734(c) or
(d)of the Act, the Department shall take action it determines appropriate under section 734(i) of the Act and the Department's regulations. B. Pursuant to section 734(i) of the Act the Department will refer any intentional violations of the Agreement to U.S. Customs and Border Protection. Any person who intentionally violates the Agreement shall be subject to a civil penalty assessed in the same amount, in the same manner, and under the same procedures as the penalty imposed for a fraudulent violation of section 592(a) of the Act. A fraudulent violation of section 592(a) of the Act is punishable by a civil penalty in an amount not to exceed the domestic value of the merchandise. For purposes of the Agreement, the domestic value of the merchandise will be deemed to be the reference price, as the signatories agree not to sell the subject merchandise at prices that are less than the reference price or to ensure that sales of the subject merchandise are made consistent with the terms of the Agreement. C. In addition, the Department will examine the activities of signatories, their Selling Agents, and any other party to a sale subject to the Agreement to determine whether any activities conducted by any party aided or abetted another party's violation of the Agreement. If any such parties are found to have aided or abetted another party's violation of the Agreement, they shall be subject to the same civil penalties described in section V.B. above. Signatories of this Agreement consent to the release of all information presented to or obtained by the Department during the conduct of verifications with U.S. Customs and Border Protection and/or the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Further, through a contractual arrangement, signatories shall require that the Selling Agent consent to the release of all information presented to or obtained by the Department during the conduct of verifications with U.S. Customs and Border Protection and/or the U.S. Department of Agriculture. D. The following activities shall be considered violations of the Agreement: 1. Sales that are at net prices (after rebates, backbilling, discounts for quality and other claims) that are below the reference price. 2. Any act or practice which would have the effect of hiding the real price of the fresh tomatoes being sold ( *e.g.* , a bundling arrangement, discounts/free goods financing package, swap, or other exchange). 3. Sales that are not in accordance with the terms and conditions applied by the Department when calculating prices for transactions involving adjustments due to changes in condition after shipment as detailed in Appendix D of this Agreement. 4. Selling signatory tomatoes to Canada in a manner that is not consistent with the requirements of Appendix E of this Agreement. 5. Selling signatory tomatoes for processing in the United States in a manner that is not consistent with the requirements of Appendix F of this Agreement. 6. Any other act or practice that the Department or U.S. Customs and Border Protection finds in violation of the Agreement. VI. Other Provisions A. In entering into this Agreement the signatories do not admit that any exports of fresh tomatoes from Mexico are having or have had an injurious effect on fresh tomato producers in the United States or have been sold at less than fair value. The signatories also do not admit that greenhouse, cherry, or any other particular type of tomatoes are properly considered within the scope of the underlying investigation. B. The signatories may withdraw from this Agreement upon ninety days written notice to the Department. C. Upon request, the Department will advise any signatory of the Department's methodology for calculating its export price (or constructed export price) and normal value, which, for purposes of this Agreement, are described in Appendix B of this Agreement. Further, the Department reserves the right to modify its methodology in calculating export price (or constructed export price) and normal value. VII. Disclosure and Comment A. If the Department proposes to revise the reference price as a result of consultations under this Agreement, not later than three months prior to the first day of each semi-annual period, the Department will disclose the results and the methodology of the Department's calculation of the preliminary reference price established for that upcoming semi-annual period. B. Not later than seven days after the date of disclosure under paragraph VII.A., the parties to the proceeding may submit written comments to the Department, not to exceed fifteen pages. After reviewing these submissions, the Department will provide the final reference price for the upcoming semi-annual period, normally within thirty days after the date of disclosure under paragraph VII.A. C. The Department may make available to representatives of each interested party to the proceeding, under appropriately drawn administrative protective orders, any business proprietary information submitted to the Department pursuant to section IV. of this Agreement, as well as the results of the Department's analysis of that information. VIII. Termination Termination of the suspended investigation will be considered in accordance with the five-year review provisions of section 351.218 of the Department's regulations. IX. Effective Date The effective date of the Agreement is January 22, 2008. David M. Spooner, *Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.* Dated: January 22, 2008. The following parties hereby certify that the members of their organization agree to abide by all terms of the Agreement: Ing. Manuel Esteban Tarriba Urtuzuastegui, President. (Name and Title of Certifying Official) (Signature of Certifying Official) For CAADES, Sinaloa, A.C. Dated: January 10th 2008. Victor Rodríguez Hernández, President (Name and Title of Certifying Official) (Signature of Certifying Official) For Consejo Agricola de Baja California, A.C. Dated: January 14th 2008. Cesar Campana Acosta, President (Name and Title of Certifying Official) (Signature of Certifying Official) For Asociacion Mexicana de Horticultura Protegida, A.C. Dated: January 10th of 2008. Gaspar Zaragoza Yberri, President (Name and Title of Certifying Official) (Signature of Certifying Official) For Union Agricola Regional de Sonora, Productores de Hortalizas Frutas y Legumbres Dated: January 11 of 2008. Basilio Gatzionis Torres, President (Name and Title of Certifying Official) (Signature of Certifying Official) For Confederacion Nacional de Productores de Hortalizas Dated: January 9, 2008. Appendix A—Suspension of Antidumping Investigation—Fresh Tomatoes From Mexico—Reference Price Consistent with the requirements of section 734(c) of the Act, to eliminate completely the injurious effect of exports to the United States and to prevent the suppression or undercutting of price levels of domestic fresh tomatoes, the Department and signatory producer/exporters of subject merchandise hereby agree to adopt the reference prices calculated based on the methodology outlined in the November 1, 1996, agreement suspending the antidumping investigation involving fresh tomatoes from Mexico, as amended on August 14, 1998. See *Suspension of Antidumping Investigation; Fresh Tomatoes from Mexico,* 61 FR 56618, 56620 (November 1, 1996), October 28, 1996, Memorandum to Robert S. LaRussa titled “The Prevention of Price Suppression or Undercutting of Price Levels in the Suspension Agreement Covering Fresh Tomatoes from Mexico,” *Amendment to the Suspension Agreement on Fresh Tomatoes from Mexico,* 63 FR 43674 (August 14, 1998), and *Final Results of Analysis of Reference Prices and Clarifications and Corrections; Agreement Suspending the Antidumping Duty Investigation on Fresh Tomatoes from Mexico,* 68 FR 62281 (November 3, 2003). Accordingly, the reference price for the July 1 through October 22 period will be $0.172 per pound and the reference price for the October 23 through June 30 period will be $0.2169 per pound. These reference prices will remain in effect unless modified in accordance with the provisions of paragraph IV.G. of the Agreement. The term “reference price” refers to the price F.O.B. from the Selling Agent. The reference price includes all palletizing and cooling charges incurred prior to shipment from the Selling Agent. The actual movement or handling expenses beyond the point of entry into the United States ( *e.g.* , McAllen, Nogales, Otay Mesa) must be added to the reference price and must reflect the cost for an arm's-length transaction. The chart below contains examples of certain minimum common trucking charges the USDA observed during the 2007 winter season. F.O.B. Nogales to: Los Angeles New York Chicago Rate ($US)/Per Truckload $900 $5,000 $3,200 Parties should refer to *http://www.ams.usda.gov/fv/mncs/fvwires.htm* to obtain examples of common trucking charges pertinent to the current season. Where the Selling Agent sells through an affiliated party, the transfer price from the Selling Agent to the affiliate must be at or above the reference price and any subsequent sale to an unaffiliated party must include the actual cost of markups ( *e.g.* , trucking charges) that reflect arm's-length costs. For guidance on the trucking-charge markup for such resales, parties should also refer to *http://www.ams.usda.gov/fv/mncs/fvwires.htm* to obtain common trucking charges pertinent to the current season. During the Department's verifications of parties handling signatory merchandise it will ascertain whether
(1)the handling expenses beyond the point of entry into the United States are added to the reference price and reflect the actual cost for an arm's-length transaction and
(2)the transfer price from Selling Agents to their affiliates are at or above the reference price and any subsequent sale to an unaffiliated party includes markups ( *e.g.* , trucking charges) that reflect arm's-length costs. The reference price for each type of box shall be determined based on the average weights stated in the chart contained in Appendix C of the Agreement. Appendix B—Suspension of Antidumping Investigation—Fresh Tomatoes From Mexico—Analysis of Prices at Less Than Fair Value A. Normal Value The cost or price information reported to the Department that will form the basis of the normal value
(NV)calculations for purposes of the Agreement must be comprehensive in nature and based on a reliable accounting system ( *e.g.* , a system based on well-established standards and can be tied either to the audited financial statements or to the tax return filed with the Mexican government). 1. Based on Sales Prices in the Comparison Market When the Department bases normal value on sales prices, such prices will be the prices at which the foreign like product is first sold for consumption in the comparison market in the usual commercial quantities and in the ordinary course of trade. Also, to the extent practicable, the comparison shall be made at the same level of trade as the export price
(EP)or constructed export price (CEP). The calculation of normal value based on a sales price in the comparison market will vary depending on whether the comparison is price-to-EP or price-to-CEP. 2. Constructed Value When normal value is based on constructed value, the Department will compute constructed values
(CVs)for each growing season based on the sum of each respondent's growing and harvesting costs for each type of tomato, plus amounts for selling, general and administrative expenses (SG&A), U.S. packing costs, and profit. The Department will collect this cost data for an entire growing season in order to determine the accurate per-unit CV of that growing season. Calculation of CV: + Direct Materials + Direct Labor + Factory overhead = Cost of Manufacturing + Home Market SG&A* = Cost of Production + U.S. Packing + Profit* = Constructed Value
(CV)* SG&A and profit are based on home-market sales of the foreign like product made in the ordinary course of trade. B. Export Price and Constructed Export Price EP and CEP refer to the two types of calculated prices for merchandise imported into the United States. Both EP and CEP are based on the price at which the subject merchandise is first sold to a person not affiliated with the foreign producer or exporter. Calculation of EP: Gross Unit Price − Movement Expenses − Discounts and Rebates = Export Price
(EP)Calculation of CEP: Gross Unit Price − Movement Expenses − Discounts and Rebates − Direct Selling Expenses − Indirect Selling Expenses that relate to commercial activity in the United States − The cost of any further manufacture or assembly incurred in the United States − CEP Profit = Constructed Export Price
(CEP)C. Fair Comparisons To ensure that a fair comparison with normal value is made, the Department will make adjustments to the price to the first unaffiliated customer in calculating the EP or CEP. For both EP and CEP the Department will add packing costs, if not already included in the price, rebated import duties, and, if applicable, certain countervailing duties. For both EP and CEP, the Department will deduct transportation costs and export taxes or duties. In calculating CEP, the Department will make additional deductions for commissions, direct selling expenses incurred in selling the merchandise under investigation in the United States, the cost of any further manufacture or assembly performed in the United States, and a portion of profit. In addition, the Department will deduct indirect selling expenses that relate to commercial activity in the United States. Appendix C—Suspension of Antidumping Investigation—Fresh Tomatoes From Mexico—Box Weights The Department has the sole authority to make revisions to the Box Weight Chart used to apply the reference price to particular box configurations. The reference price for each type of box shall be determined based on the average weights stated in the chart below. The Department will coordinate with U.S. Customs and Border Protection in its collection and review of data for calculating and monitoring box-specific average weights. To derive representative average weights for each box type in the chart below, the Department will weigh twenty sample boxes, randomly chosen without notice, from three different shippers ( *i.e.* , an average weight of sixty boxes for each box type in the chart). If the Department determines to revise an average weight figure based upon information that an average weight on the chart is no longer accurate, the Department will provide at least fifteen days notice to signatories (either directly or through their representative in this proceeding) prior to the effective date of such revised average weights for purposes of this Agreement. The Department will determine the revised average weight in accordance with the procedure described above. Once the Department determines the revised average weight, the weight will become effective at the beginning of the next growing season (which will be either July 1 or October 23 of a year). In the event that a signatory intends to export subject merchandise to the United States in a box for which there is no average weight on the chart, the signatory shall notify the Department in writing no later than forty-five days prior to the date of the first exportation of such boxes to the United States. Signatories can obtain from the Department's Web site a copy of the suggested form for submitting this information. See “Notification of Intent to Ship Tomatoes in a Specialty Pack” at *http://ia.ita.doc.gov/tomato/2008-agreement/documents/suggested_forms/.* This information must be submitted to the Department in accordance with the filing instructions set forth under 19 CFR 353.31 and 353.32. The Department shall allow any interested party to submit written comments, not to exceed ten pages, on the appropriate average weight for the box within seven days after the filing of the written notification by the signatory, and the Department shall inform the signatory or its representative of the average weight for the box no later than thirty days after filing of the written notification by the signatory. Box-Weight Chart.—Suspension of Antidumping Investigation on Fresh Tomatoes From Mexico Box type * Layers Size Avg. Kg. weight Avg. Lb. weight ** July 1- October 22 $0.172/lb Reference price October 23-June 30 $0.2169/lb Reference price Tomato (cherry) 12 Baskets 6.32 13.93 2.40 3.02 Tomato (cherry) Bulk Bulk 8.13 17.92 3.08 3.89 Tomato 2L 4 x 4 10.78 23.77 4.09 5.16 Tomato 2L 4 x 5 10.81 23.83 4.10 5.17 Tomato 2L 5 x 5 10.43 22.99 3.96 4.99 Tomato 2L 5 x 6 9.71 21.41 3.68 4.64 Tomato 3L 6 x 6 13.33 29.39 5.05 6.37 Tomato 3L 6 x 7 12.92 28.48 4.90 6.18 Tomato Bulk 25 lbs.*** 12.15 26.79 4.61 5.81 Tomato 1L Long Box 7.41 16.34 2.81 3.54 Tomato (Green) Bulk Small—20 lb. 8.16 17.99 3.09 3.90 Tomato Grape Bulk 20 lb. 9.42 20.77 3.57 4.51 Tomato Grape Clam Shell 12 Baskets—12 oz. 4.71 10.38 1.79 2.25 Tomato Cluster 1L 11 lb. Flat 5.58 12.31 2.12 2.67 * Applicable regardless of production method ( *e.g.* , field grown or greenhouse grown). ** Conversion factor from kg. to lb. based on 1 kg. = 2.20462 lbs. *** Also applicable to 4/7 bushel cartons. Appendix D—Suspension of Antidumping Investigation—Fresh Tomatoes From Mexico—Procedures for Making Adjustments to the Sales Price Due to Certain Changes in Condition After Shipment The purpose of this appendix is to explain the procedures for making adjustments to the sales price of signatory tomatoes due to certain changes in condition after shipment, such that the sales price for any tomatoes accepted in a lot 1 do not fall below the reference price. The procedures outlined in this appendix only apply if the adjustment reduces the net sales price below the reference price. 1 For these purposes, a lot is defined as a grouping of tomatoes in a particular shipment that is distinguishable by packing type. As explained in Appendix A of the Agreement, the term “reference price” refers to the price F.O.B. from the Selling Agent. The reference price includes all palletizing and cooling charges incurred prior to shipment from the Selling Agent. The actual movement or handling expenses beyond the point of entry into the United States ( *e.g.* , McAllen, Nogales, Otay Mesa) must be added to the reference price and must reflect the cost for an arm's-length transaction. The chart below contains examples of certain minimum common trucking charges the USDA observed during the 2007 winter season. F.O.B. Nogales to: Los Angeles New York Chicago Rate ($US)/Per Truckload $900 $5,000 $3,200 Parties should refer to *http://www.ams.usda.gov/fv/mncs/fvwires.htm* to obtain examples of common trucking charges pertinent to the current season. Where the Selling Agent sells through an affiliated party, the transfer price from the Selling Agent to the affiliate must be at or above the reference price and any subsequent sale to an unaffiliated party must include the actual cost of markups ( *e.g.* , trucking charges) that reflect arm's-length costs. For guidance on the trucking-charge markup for such resales, parties should also refer to *http://www.ams.usda.gov/fv/mncs/fvwires.htm* to obtain common trucking charges pertinent to the current season. Appendix G of the Agreement outlines specific actions that signatories should take to ensure that their efforts to abide by the Agreement are upheld in any claims taken to the U.S. Department of Agriculture under the Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act. To facilitate the verification of claims for changes in condition after shipment, the contract between the signatory and the Selling Agent must establish that claims be resolved and all paper work be completed within fifteen business days after the USDA inspection unless the claim is referred to PACA for mediation. When filing quarterly certifications with the Department, signatories should report the number of lots on which claims for condition defects were granted, the total volume of tomatoes destroyed or donated, and the total value of claims granted. Signatories can obtain from the Department's Web site a copy of the suggested form for submitting the quarterly certification information. See “Quarterly Certification” at *http://ia.ita.doc.gov/tomato/2008-agreement/documents/suggested_forms/* . A. Contractual Terms for Rejecting All or Part of a Lot 1. A USDA inspection certificate must be provided to support claims for rejection of all or part of a lot. Further, no adjustments will be made for failure to meet suitable shipping conditions unless supported by an unrestricted USDA inspection. 2. If the USDA inspection indicates that the lot has:
(1)Over 8% soft/decay condition defects;
(2)over 15% of any one condition defect; or
(3)greater than 20% total condition defects, the receiver may reject the lot or may accept a portion of the lot and reject the quantity of tomatoes lost during the salvaging process. In those instances, price adjustments will be calculated as described below. For purposes of this Agreement, a condition defect is any defect listed in the chart in part A.5. below. When a lot of tomatoes has condition defects in excess of those outlined above as documented on a USDA inspection certificate, the documented percentage of the tomatoes with condition defects are considered DEFECTIVE tomatoes. 3. No adjustments will be made for failure to meet suitable shipping conditions if the USDA inspection certificate does not indicate one of the condition thresholds outlined above. 4. The USDA inspection must be called for no more than six hours from the time of arrival at the destination specified by the receiver and be performed in a timely fashion thereafter. If there is more than one USDA inspection on a given lot, the inspection certificate corresponding to the first inspection is the one that will be used for making any adjustment to the sales price. However, if an appeal inspection is conducted, it will supercede the first inspection, as long as the appeal inspection is requested within a reasonable amount of time from the first inspection. The first receiver of the product, regardless of whether that receiver is acting as an agent or a broker for an unrelated purchaser or whether the receiver is the unrelated purchaser acting on its own right, must specify the city/metropolitan area of the destination of the product. The inspection will take place at the destination of delivery as specified prior to shipment. No adjustments will be granted for a USDA inspection at a destination which is different from the destination specified by the first receiver of the product. In the event that the first receiver does not specify the city/metropolitan area of the destination of the product, the six-hour period within which an inspection may be requested will begin to run at such time as title to the product transfers to the unrelated purchaser, for example, upon loading of the product at the first handler's (importer's) warehouse in an F.O.B. transaction and upon delivery of the product to the first buyer's warehouse in a delivered sale. A person or company shall be considered an agent or broker for an unrelated purchaser:
(1)When that person or company falls within the description of types of broker operations set forth in 7 CFR 46.27; or
(2)have provided a broker's memorandum of sale as set forth in 7 CFR 46.28(a). The following paragraphs apply if a broker or dealer is involved in the transaction. A broker, unlike a dealer, does not take ownership or control of the tomatoes but arranges for delivery directly to the vendor or purchaser. Because a broker never takes ownership or control over the tomatoes, the customer and not the broker may request an inspection, and only the customer is entitled to any resulting adjustments. The inspection would take place at the customer's destination, as specified in the broker's contract with the Selling Agent. When a dealer is involved in the sale, the destination of delivery stated in the contract is where the inspection is to take place. If the dealer does not specify the destination of delivery, the default destination of delivery is the warehouse of the Selling Agent. With respect to a lot of tomatoes that is owned or controlled by a dealer, it is the responsibility of the dealer to request an inspection of the tomatoes in his possession in a timely manner, if he deems it necessary. If the dealer does not request an inspection in a timely manner ( *i.e.* , within six hours from the time of arrival at the destination specified by the dealer) and resells the tomatoes to a third party, which does request an inspection, the dealer is then responsible for all costs and adjustments pertaining to the inspection and the condition or quality of the tomatoes. 5. Under this Agreement, adjustments to the sales price of signatory tomatoes will be permitted only for condition defects. The term “condition defect” is intended to have the same definition recognized by the Fresh Produce Branch of the United States Department of Agriculture, with the exception of abnormal coloring, and, therefore, covers the following items: Condition Defects
(1)Sunken & Discolored Areas
(2)Sunburn
(3)Internal Discoloration
(4)Freezing Injury
(5)Chilling Injury
(6)Gray Mold Rot
(7)Bacterial Soft Rot
(8)Soft/Decay**
(9)Bruising
(10)Nailhead Spot
(11)Skin Checks
(12)Decayed and Moldy Stems
(13)Waxy Blister
(14)White Core
(15)Discolored or Dried-out Jelly Around Seeds ** The most common decays listed by the USDA are pleospora rot, phoma rot, alternaria rot, and blossom end rot. 6. In calculating the transaction price for lots subject to an adjustment claim for condition defects, as defined above, the tomatoes classified as DEFECTIVE will be treated as rejected and as not having been sold. B. Contractual Terms for Rejection of Partial Loads If the lot contains condition defects greater than those outlined above and the receiver does not reject the entire lot of tomatoes, the Department will factor certain adjustments into the transaction price, provided that the following conditions apply: 1. The price invoiced to and paid by the receiver for the accepted tomatoes must not fall below the reference price. 2. The Selling Agent may reimburse the receiver for actual destruction costs associated with the DEFECTIVE tomatoes. If properly documented, these expenses will not be considered in the calculation of the price of the accepted tomatoes. 3. The Selling Agent may reimburse the receiver for the portion of freight expenses allocated to the DEFECTIVE tomatoes. If properly documented, these expenses will not be considered in the calculation of the price of the accepted tomatoes. 4. If the Selling Agent follows the guidelines outlined below, it may reimburse the receiver for repacking charges directly associated with salvaging and reconditioning the lot. If properly documented, these expenses will not be considered in the calculation of the price of the accepted tomatoes. a. If the salvaging and reconditioning activity is performed by a party unaffiliated with the Selling Agent's customer the fee charged for the service may be reimbursed if the Selling Agent's customer can provide evidence for such costs ( *i.e.* , specifically, proof-of-payment documentation for the invoice from the repacker). b. If the salvaging and reconditioning activity is performed by the Selling Agent's customer or a party affiliated with the Selling Agent, the direct labor costs or, in lieu thereof, one-half of the ordinary and customary repacking charges may be reimbursed. To substantiate such costs the Selling Agent's customer or party affiliated with the Selling Agent must provide detailed records of the labor cost incurred for repacking or, where applicable, evidence of the ordinary and customary repacking costs. 5. The Selling Agent may reimburse the receiver for the inspection fees listed on the USDA inspection certificate. If properly documented, these expenses will not be considered in the calculation of the price of the accepted tomatoes. 6. Any reimbursements from, by, or on behalf of the Selling Agent that are not specifically mentioned in items B.2., B.3., B.4., or B.5. above, or that are not properly documented, will be factored into the calculation of the price for the accepted tomatoes. 7. The receiver may not resell the DEFECTIVE tomatoes. The receiver may choose to have the DEFECTIVE tomatoes destroyed, donated to non-profit food banks, or returned to the Selling Agent. The DEFECTIVE tomatoes may not be sold. 2 2 Tomatoes for processing must be handled in accordance with the guidelines set forth in Appendix F of the Agreement. 8. In addition, for each transaction involving adjustments due to changes in condition after shipment the Selling Agent must obtain/maintain the following documents/information: —Shipper name. —Shipping manifest. —Details of the shipper invoice, including invoice number, date, brand, tomato type, quantity (boxes), and value. —Documentation supporting the freight expenses incurred for the original shipment. —USDA inspection certificate. —Detailed listing of the expenses incurred in salvaging the non-DEFECTIVE tomatoes and documentation supporting the expenses. —Description of the destruction or donation process and documentation from the landfill or food bank. —Proof-of-payment documentation for any destruction costs. —A statement that “No monies or other compensation was received for the destroyed or donated tomatoes.” —Signature of a responsible official at the receiver. C. Contractual Terms for Rejection of Full Loads In cases where the receiver has rejected the full lot of tomatoes based on condition defects, the Selling Agent may choose to have the entire lot destroyed, donated to non-profit food banks, or returned. If the entire lot is destroyed or donated, the Selling Agent will require the receiver to provide the documentation noted above for partial-lot rejections. Further, the Selling Agent may reimburse the receiver for ordinary and customary expenses that the receiver incurred with respect to the lot, including those expenses associated with the destruction or donation process, as long as the Selling Agent obtains the support documentation specified above under B.8. The Department will treat such transactions as “non-sales” provided that adequate support documentation is available. Alternatively, the Selling Agent may sell the entire rejected lot to another receiver. In that case, the price paid must be not less than the reference price plus all costs incurred ( *e.g.* , transportation, commissions, etc.) from the F.O.B. port of entry to the final receiver. If the final receiver finds that the lot contains condition defects greater than those outlined above, it shall follow the directions stated above with respect to rejection of partial loads. D. Contractual Terms for Partial vs. Unrestricted Lot Inspections As explained in part A.1. above, the Department will only allow adjustments to the transaction price for condition defects if the USDA inspection is unrestricted. During the time between the call for inspection and the arrival of the USDA inspector, the receiver might sell part of the lot and, therefore, by the time the USDA inspector arrives, that part is not available for inspection. If the USDA inspector is allowed full access to the partial lot, the Department will consider this an unrestricted partial-lot inspection. Alternatively, if the USDA inspector is not allowed full access to the partial lot, the Department will deem it a restricted inspection. No adjustments will be made for failure to meet suitable shipping conditions if the USDA inspection is restricted. For purposes of this Agreement, when calculating an adjustment for failure to meet suitable shipping conditions where an unrestricted partial-lot inspection has taken place, only the portion of the lot inspected is eligible for adjustment. The portion of the lot that the receiver sold prior to the inspection will not be eligible for an adjustment based on the USDA inspection. For example, before the USDA inspector arrives, the receiver sells 140 boxes of 5x5s from a lot identified as 160 5x5s on the invoice. When the USDA inspector arrives the receiver requesting the inspection provides full access to the partial lot within its possession. The inspector finds that the partial lot of 20 5x5s has soft/decay condition defects of 25 percent and notes this on this inspection certificate. Under the Agreement, only the 20 5x5s are eligible for an adjustment for failure to meet suitable shipping conditions, and the 140 5x5s that the receiver already sold will not be eligible for an adjustment based on the USDA inspection. Appendix E—Suspension of Antidumping Investigation—Fresh Tomatoes From Mexico—Contractual Arrangement for Documenting Sales of Signatory Merchandise to Canada Based on our experience in this proceeding, it is common practice for the signatory's Selling Agent to enter the merchandise into the United States for consumption and then re-export it to Canada. The purpose of this appendix is to:
(1)Outline the process that each signatory of this Agreement must follow to ensure that the Selling Agent properly documents sales to Canada as such and
(2)ensure that the signatory notifies the Canadian customer that any resales of its merchandise from Canada into the United States must be in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. To document sales of Mexican tomatoes to Canada properly, this Agreement requires that such transactions be made pursuant to a contractual arrangement where each signatory requires that the Selling Agent that facilitates the sale to Canada maintain the following information in its files: 1. Signatory name and identification number; 2. Shipping manifest; 3. An invoice identifying sale date, brand, tomato type, quantity (boxes), and value; and 4. Entry documentation from Canadian Customs ( *i.e.* , Landing Form (Form B3) or the Canada Customs Coding Form). If a signatory to the Agreement or its Selling Agent does not document a sale to Canada in accordance with the procedures outlined above, the Department will consider the transaction a U.S. sale. We also require signatories to ensure that the Canadian customer is notified that any resale of the signatory merchandise from Canada into the United States must be in accordance with the terms of the Agreement and that any movement or handling expenses beyond the point of export from Mexico must be added to the reference price and must reflect the actual cost for an arm's-length transaction. Signatories can obtain from the Department's Web site a copy of the suggested form for providing such notification. See “Form for Notifying Canadian Customer That Resales of Signatory Merchandise Into the United States Are Covered by the Terms of the 2008 Suspension Agreement” at *http://ia.ita.doc.gov/tomato/2008-agreement/documents/suggested_forms/* . Further, through contractual arrangement each signatory must require that the Selling Agent maintain evidence in its files to document that the Canadian customer was notified that any resales of the signatory merchandise from Canada into the United States must be in accordance with the terms of the Agreement. Appendix F—Suspension of Antidumping Investigation—Fresh Tomatoes From Mexico—Procedure Signatories Must Follow for Selling Subject Merchandise for Processing Sales to the United States of signatory tomatoes for processing must be: 1. Sold directly to a processor (in other words, the first purchaser in the United States of tomatoes for processing must be an actual processor); 2. Accompanied by an “Importer's Exempt Commodity Form”—Form FV-6, within the meaning of 7 CFR section 980.501(a)(2) and 980.212(I), should be used for all tomatoes for processing that are covered by the Florida Marketing Order; tomatoes for processing that are not covered by the Florida Marketing Order ( *e.g.* , romas, grape tomatoes, greenhouse tomatoes and any tomatoes that are entered during the part of the year that the Florida Marketing Order is not in effect) must be accompanied by the “2008 Suspension Agreement—Tomatoes for Processing Exemption Form”. The exempt commodity form must be presented to U.S. Customs and Border Patrol at the time of crossing at the port of entry into the United States and both the Selling Agent and the processor must maintain a copy of the form. 3. Shipped in a packing form that is not typical of tomatoes for the fresh market ( *e.g.* , bulk containers in excess of 50 lbs)—examples of typical fresh-market packing forms are identified in the Box-Weight Chart in Appendix C of the Agreement; and 4. Clearly labeled on the packaging as “Tomatoes for Processing”. Signatories can obtain from the Department's Web site an example of the “2008 Suspension Agreement—Tomatoes for Processing Exemption Form”. See *http://ia.ita.doc.gov/tomato/2008-agreement/documents/suggested_forms/* . If a party in the United States facilitates the transaction, through contractual arrangement each signatory must require that the party follow the procedures outlined above. Appendix G—Suspension of Antidumping Investigation—Fresh Tomatoes From Mexico—Specific Actions That Signatories Should Take To Ensure That Their Efforts To Abide by the Agreement Are Upheld in any Claims Taken to the U.S. Department of Agriculture Under the Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act This appendix provides guidance on the specific actions signatories can take to ensure that their efforts to abide by the Agreement are upheld in any claims taken to the Department of Agriculture under the Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act (PACA). The former Chief of the Department of Agriculture's PACA branch, James R. Frazier, has confirmed that this Agreement is enforceable under PACA regulations and PACA's claim settlement process. According to Mr. Frazier, in settling a claim, PACA will uphold actions taken by a signatory or a signatory's representative (collectively “signatory”) to comply with the Agreement to the extent that the sales contract for the transaction at issue establishes that the sale is subject to the terms of the Agreement. In other words, if, prior to making the sale, the signatory, or the Selling Agent acting on behalf of the signatory through a contractual arrangement, informs the customer that the sale is subject to the terms of the Agreement and identifies those terms, PACA will recognize the identified terms of the Agreement as integral to the sales contract. In particular, signatories should inform their customers that their contractual agreement to allow defect claim adjustments is limited in accordance with the Agreement, including: • Claims for adjustments must be supported by an unrestricted USDA inspection called for no more than six hours from the time of arrival at the receiver and performed in a timely fashion thereafter. • The USDA inspection must find that the condition defects exceed the thresholds outlined in Appendix D above. • Any price adjustments will be limited to the actual percentage of condition defects as documented by a USDA inspection certificate. • The price adjustments will be limited to actual destruction costs, the allocated freight expense, and salvaging and reconditioning expenses calculated in accordance with Appendix D above. • The customer may not resell any defective tomatoes. Instead, they must be destroyed, returned or donated to a non-profit food bank. Signatories should provide a copy of the Agreement to any customer which may be unfamiliar with its terms or which has questions about those terms. The process by which a signatory could provide evidence to PACA that its sales contracts were made subject to the terms of the Agreement including, in particular, those terms listed above is outlined below. • The signatory should maintain written documentation demonstrating that it had informed its customers and the customers accepted that the sales were subject to the terms of the Agreement prior to issuing the invoice. A signed contract to that effect would be the best evidence of that fact; however, a purchase by the customer after being informed of the relevance of the Agreement is evidence of acceptance. • The signatory should send letters to its customers via registered mail, return receipt requested, informing the customers that, as a signatory to the Agreement, all of the signatory's sales are subject to the terms of the Agreement and that, by purchasing from them, the buyer agrees to those terms. The letter should also indicate that the signatory's sales personnel do not have authority to alter the terms of the Agreement. • In addition, the signatory should include a statement on its order confirmation sheets that its contract with the buyer is subject to the terms of the Agreement as detailed in the signatory's “pre-season” letter and maintain a copy of the order confirmations and fax receipts demonstrating that they were sent to the customer prior to making the sale. If the sale is to a first-time purchaser that did not receive a “pre-season” letter, a letter should be supplied to the buyer prior to making a sale. • The signatory should instruct its sales personnel to inform customers making purchases by telephone or at the loading dock that the sale is subject to the terms of the Agreement and its restrictions on price adjustments and, by purchasing from them, the buyer agrees to those terms. In fact, the sales personnel should provide a copy of the letter to the customer and, ideally, have the customer acknowledge receipt of the letter, in writing, prior to making the sale. Such an established practice will help to ensure that even new customers are informed properly of the terms of sale prior to completing a contract. PACA does not require any one particular form of written documentation but USDA officials have confirmed that, if signatories maintain written evidence demonstrating that their customers were informed that their sales were made subject to the terms of the Agreement prior to sale, PACA will recognize those terms as part of the sales contract. [FR Doc. E8-1442 Filed 1-25-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; NOAA Satellite Groundstation Customer Questionnaire AGENCY: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Department of Commerce. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. DATES: Written comments must be submitted on or before March 28, 2008. ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments to Diana Hynek, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Department of Commerce, Room 6625, 14th and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230 (or via the Internet at *dHynek@doc.gov* ). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument and instructions should be directed to Paul Seymour, 301-763-8051, extension 109 or *paul.seymour@noaa.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Abstract NOAA requests people who operate ground receiving stations that receive data from NOAA satellites to complete a questionnaire about the types of data received, its use, the equipment involved, and similar subjects. The data obtained are used by NOAA for short-term operations and long-term planning. II. Method of Collection The information is collected via an online questionnaire. III. Data *OMB Number:* 0648-0227. *Form Number:* None. *Type of Review:* Regular submission. *Affected Public:* Not-for-profit institutions, business or other for-profit organizations, Individuals or households, Federal Government, and State, Local or Tribal Government. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 300. *Estimated Time Per Response:* 5 minutes. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 25. *Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public:* $0 in capital and recordkeeping/reporting costs. IV. Request for Comments Comments are invited on:
(a)Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility;
(b)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information;
(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 through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval of this information collection; they also will become a matter of public record. Dated: January 22, 2008. Gwellnar Banks, Management Analyst, Office of the Chief Information Officer. [FR Doc. E8-1408 Filed 1-25-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-HR-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XD79 Incidental Takes of Marine Mammals During Specified Activities; Black Abalone Research Surveys at San Nicolas Island, Ventura County, CA AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental take authorization. SUMMARY: In accordance with the Marine Mammal Protection Act
(MMPA)regulations, NMFS has issued an Incidental Harassment Authorization
(IHA)to Dr. Glenn VanBlaricom (Dr. VanBlaricom) for the take of marine mammals, by Level B harassment only, incidental to the assessment of black abalone populations at San Nicolas Island (SNI), CA. DATES: The IHA is effective from January 18, 2008, through January 17, 2009. ADDRESSES: A copy of the IHA and the application are available by writing to Michael Payne, Chief, Permits, Conservation and Education Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910-3225, or by telephoning the contact listed here. A copy of the application containing a list of the references used in this document may be obtained by writing to the address specified above, telephoning the contact listed below (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT ), or online at: *http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm* . Documents cited in this notice may be viewed, by appointment, during regular business hours, at the aforementioned address. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Howard Goldstein or Jolie Harrison, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS,
(301)713-2289, ext. 172. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and
(D)of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 *et seq.* ) direct the Secretary of Commerce to allow, upon request, the incidental, but not intentional, taking of marine mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than commercial fishing) within a specified geographical region if certain findings are made and either regulations are issued or, if the taking is limited to harassment, a notice of a proposed authorization is provided to the public for review. Authorization shall be granted if NMFS finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or stock(s) and will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or stock(s) for certain subsistence uses, and if the permissible methods of taking and requirements pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such takings are set forth. NMFS has defined “negligible impact” in 50 CFR 216.103 as ”...an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival.” Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA established an expedited process by which citizens of the United States can apply for an authorization to incidentally take small numbers of marine mammals by harassment. Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, the MMPA defines “harassment” as: any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which
(i)has the potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild [Level A harassment]; or
(ii)has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering [Level B harassment]. Section 101(a)(5)(D) establishes a 45-day time limit for NMFS review of an application followed by a 30-day public notice and comment period on any proposed authorizations for the incidental harassment of marine mammals. Within 45 days of the close of the comment period, NMFS must either issue or deny issuance of the authorization. Summary of Request On November 5, 2007, NMFS received a letter from Dr. VanBlaricom, of the Washington Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, requesting renewal of an IHA that was first issued to him on September 23, 2003 (68 FR 57427, October 3, 2003), and was last reissued on December 1, 2006 (71 FR 71136, December 8, 2006). The proposed 2008 IHA was published, and comments solicited, on December 11, 2007 (72 FR 70311). The final IHA would authorize the take, by harassment, of small numbers of California sea lions ( *Zalophus californianus* ), Pacific harbor seals ( *Phoca vitulina richardsi* ), and northern elephant seals ( *Mirounga angustirostris* ) incidental to research surveys performed for the purpose of assessing trends in black abalone ( *Haliotis cracherodii* ) populations at SNI, Ventura County, California. The proposed research consists of 2 researchers, on foot, counting abalone at nine permanent sites (1 m 2 each) on SNI twice a year, with one brief additional visit to each site for maintenance. Population trend data for black abalone populations have become important in a conservation context because of:
(a)the reintroduction of sea otters to SNI in 1987, raising the possibility of conflict between otter conservation and abalone populations (abalones are often significant prey for sea otters);
(b)the appearance of a novel exotic disease, abalone withering syndrome, at SNI in 1992, resulting in dramatically increased rates of abalone mortality at the Island; and,
(c)the recent designation of California populations of black abalones as a species of concern in the context of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Research is done under the auspices of the Washington Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, the University of Washington, and the U.S. Navy (owner of SNI), with additional logistical support from the University of California, Santa Cruz. Additional information on the research is contained in the application, which is available upon request (see ADDRESSES ). Project Description Nine permanent abalone research study areas are located in rocky intertidal habitats on SNI in Ventura County, CA. The applicant has made 111 separate field trips to SNI from September 1979 through October 2007, participating in abalone survey work on 591 different days at nine permanent study sites. Under the latest authorization, Dr. VanBlaricom made five different trips to the island (but no more than 2 research and 1 maintenance visits to most sites with pinnipeds; sites without pinnipeds may be visited more often) and conducted work for 27 total days in the one year period. Quantitative abalone surveys on SNI began in 1981, at which point permanent research sites were chosen based on the presence of dense patches of abalone in order to monitor changes over time in dense abalone aggregations. Research is conducted by counting black abalone in plots of 1 m 2 (3.3 ft 2 ) along permanent transect lines in rocky intertidal habitats at each of the nine study sites on the island. Permanent transect lines are demarcated by stainless steel eye-bolts embedded in the rock substrata and secured with marine epoxy compound. Lines are placed temporarily between bolts during surveys and are removed once surveys are completed. Survey work is done by two field biologists working on foot (sites are accessed by hiking to water from vehicle parked inland) and monitoring of black abalone populations at SNI can be done only during periods of extreme low tides. The exact date of a visit to any given site is difficult to predict because variation in surf height and sea conditions can influence the safety of field biologists as well as the quality of data collected. In most years survey work is done during the months of January, February, March, July, November, and December because of optimal availability of low tides. All work is done during daylight hours due to safety considerations. During the year, each of the nine permanent study sites at SNI will be visited three times. Abalone surveys, which take no more than 4 hours at each site, are conducted during two of the three visits to each of the nine sites. The third, and final, visit is a maintenance visit, which takes less than 30 minutes at each site and is used to take measurements and make necessary repairs to plots and is conducted in a month when smaller numbers of pinnipeds are present. The affected marine mammal populations at SNI, especially California sea lions and northern elephant seals, have grown substantially since the beginning of abalone research in 1979 and have occupied an expanded distribution on the island due to population growth. Sites previously accessible with no risk of marine mammal harassment are now being utilized by marine mammals at levels such that approach without the possibility of harassment is difficult. An IHA is warranted for this study because of the nine study sites used for the abalone surveys, only two sites can be occupied without the possibility of disturbing at least one species of pinniped. Description of Habitat and Marine Mammals in the Activity Area San Nicolas is one of the eight Channel Islands, located in the Santa Barbara Channel off Southern California. Nine miles long (14.5 km) and about three and a half miles (5.6 km) across at its widest point, it is the farthest island from the mainland, more than 60 miles (96.6 km) offshore and about 85 miles (136.8 km) southwest of Los Angeles, California. SNI is owned and operated by the U.S. Navy and is off-limits to civilians without specific permission. Many of the beaches in the Channel Islands provide resting, molting or breeding places for species of pinnipeds. On SNI, three pinniped species (northern elephant seal, Pacific harbor seal, and California sea lion) can be expected to occur on land in the vicinity of abalone research sites either regularly or in large numbers during certain times of the year. In addition, a single adult male Guadalupe fur seal ( *Arctocephalus townsendi* ) (federally listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act) was seen at one abalone research site on two occasions during the summer months in the mid-1980's. However, none have been seen since those original sightings. Further information on the biology and distribution of these species and others in the region can be found in Dr. VanBlaricom's application, which is available upon request (see ADDRESSES ), and the Marine Mammal Stock Assessment Reports, which are available online at: *http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/prot_res/PR2/Stock_Assessment_Program/individual_sars.html* . California Sea Lions The U.S. stock of California sea lions extends from the U.S./Mexico border north into Canada. Breeding areas of the sea lion are on islands located in southern California, western Baja California, and the Gulf of California and they primarily use the central California area to feed during the non-breeding season. Population estimates for the U.S. stock of California sea lions, which are based on counts conducted in 2001 and extrapolations from the number of pups, range from a minimum of 138,881 to an average of 244,000 animals, with a current growth rate of 5.4 to 6.1 percent per year (Carretta *et al.* , 2005). The California sea lion is not listed under the ESA and the U.S. stock is not considered depleted under the MMPA. California sea lions haul out at many sites on SNI and are by far the most common pinniped on the island. Over the course of a year, up to 100,000 sea lions may use SNI. Numbers of sea lions at SNI increased by about 21 percent per year between 1983 and 1995 (NMFS 2003) and sea lions have recently started occupying areas that were not formerly used. Pupping occurs on the beaches of SNI from mid-June to mid-July. Females nurse their pups for about eight days and then begin an alternating pattern of foraging at sea vs. attending and nursing the pup on land, which lasts for about eight months, and sometimes up to a year. California sea lions also haul out at SNI during the molting period in September, and smaller numbers of females and juveniles haul out during most of the year. Pacific Harbor Seals Harbor seals are widely distributed in the North Atlantic and North Pacific. In California, approximately 400-600 harbor seal haul-out sites are distributed along the mainland and on offshore islands, including intertidal sandbars, rocky shores and beaches (Hanan, 1996; Lowery *et al.* , 2005). A complete count of all harbor seals in California is impossible because some are always away from the haul-out sites. A complete pup count (as is done for other pinnipeds in California) is also not possible because harbor seals are precocious, with pups entering the water almost immediately after birth. Based on the most recent harbor seal counts (2004 and 2005) and including a correction factor for the above, the estimated population of harbor seals in California is 34,233 (Carretta *et al.* , 2005), with an estimated minimum population of 31,600 for the California stock of harbor seals. Counts of harbor seals in California showed a rapid increase from 1972 to 1990, but since 1990 there has been no net population growth along the mainland or the Channel Islands. The decrease in the growth rate may indicate that the population has reached its carrying capacity. The harbor seal is not listed under the ESA and the California stock is not considered depleted under the MMPA. Harbor seals haul out at various sandy, cobble, and gravel beaches around SNI and pupping occurs on the beaches from late February to early April, with nursing of pups extending into May. Harbor seals may also haul out during molting period in late Spring, and smaller numbers haul out at other times of year. Harbor seal abundance increased at SNI from the 1960s until 1981, but since then the average counts have not changed significantly. From 1982 to 1994, numbers of harbor seals have fluctuated between 139 and 700 harbor seals based on both peak ground counts and annual photographic survey photos. The most recent aerial count on SNI was of 457 harbor seals in 1994. Northern Elephant Seals Northern elephant seals breed and give birth in California (U.S.) and Baja California primarily on offshore islands, from December to March (Stewart *et al.* , 1994). The California breeding stock, which includes the animals on SNI, is now demographically separated from the Baja California population. Based on trends in pup counts, northern elephant seal colonies appeared to be increasing in California through 2001. The population size of northern elephant seals in California is estimated to be 101,000 animals, with a minimum population estimate of 60,547 (Carretta *et al.* , 2005). A continuous average growth rate (though it has declined a bit in recent years) of 8.3 percent has seen numbers of this species increase from 100 in 1900 to the current population size (Carretta *et al.* , 2005). The northern elephant seal is not listed under the ESA and the California stock is not considered depleted under the MMPA. Increasing numbers of elephant seals haul out at various sites around SNI. Based on a pup count in 1995 that found 6,575 pups, scientists estimated that over 23,000 elephant seals may use SNI in a year (NMFS 2003). From 1988 to 1995 the pup counts on SNI increased at an average rate of 15.4 percent per year; however, the growth rate of the population as a whole seems to have declined in recent years (NMFS 2003). Pupping occurs on the beaches of SNI from January to early February, with nursing of pups extending into March. Northern elephant seals also haul out during the molting periods in the spring and summer, and smaller numbers haul out at other times of the year. Comments and Responses On December 11, 2007, NMFS published in the **Federal Register** a notice of a proposed IHA for Dr. VanBlaricom's request to take marine mammals incidental to conducting black abalone research on SNI, and requested comments regarding this proposed IHA (72 FR 70311). During the 30-day public comment period, NMFS received one comment from the Marine Mammal Commission
(MMC)recommending NMFS issue the IHA as proposed. *Comment:* The MMC states that because the applicant is requesting authority to take marine mammals by Level B harassment only, NMFS should require that research activities be suspended immediately if an injury or mortality of a marine mammal is found in the vicinity of the operations and the mortality or injury could have occurred incidental to the research activities. MMC further recommends that any such suspension should remain in place until NMFS has:
(1)reviewed the situation and determined that further injuries or mortalities are unlikely to occur; or
(2)determined whether steps (e.g. monitoring and mitigation measures) can be taken to avoid further injuries or mortalities; or
(3)issued regulations to govern such takes under section 101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA. *Response:* NMFS concurs with MMC's recommendation and has included a requirement to this effect in the IHA. NMFS authorizes the applicant to take marine mammals by Level B harassment only. Potential Effects of Activities on Marine Mammal Variable numbers of sea lions, harbor seals, and elephant seals typically haul out near seven of the nine study sites used for abalone research, with breeding activity occurring at four of these seven sites. Pinnipeds likely to be affected by abalone research activity are those that are hauled out on land at or near study sites. Incidental harassment may result if hauled animals move away from the abalone researchers. For the purpose of estimating numbers of pinnipeds taken by these activities, NMFS assumes that pinnipeds that move or change the direction of their movement in response to the presence of researchers are taken by Level B Harassment. Animals that merely raise their head and look at the researcher are not considered to have been taken. Although marine mammals will not be deliberately approached by abalone survey personnel, approach may be unavoidable if pinnipeds are hauled out directly upon the permanent abalone study plots. In almost all cases, shoreline habitats near the abalone study sites are gently sloping sandy beaches or horizontal sandstone platforms with unimpeded and non-hazardous access to the water. If disturbed, hauled animals may move toward the water without risk of encountering significant hazards. In these circumstances, the risk of injury or death to hauled animals is very low. The risk of marine mammal injury or mortality associated with abalone research increases somewhat if disturbances occur during breeding season, as it is possible that mothers and dependent pups could become separated. If separated pairs don't reunite fairly quickly, risks of mortality to pups (through starvation) may increase. Also, adult northern elephant seals may trample elephant seal pups if disturbed, which could potentially result in the injury or death of pups. However, NMFS has included time of year restrictions to limit the presence of researchers to months that California sea lion and harbor seal dependent pups are not present at the survey sites. Additionally, though elephant seal pups are occasionally present at abalone surveys, risk of pup mortalities are very low because elephant seals are far less reactive to researcher presence than the other two species (an estimated 32 total elephant seals have been disturbed in the last four years out of 2074 present around the study site). Last, researchers will use great care approaching sites; and pups are on the sand while the permanent study sites are on rocks, which leaves the two always separated by at least 50 m (164 ft). Because of the circumstances and the IHA requirements discussed above, NMFS believes it highly unlikely that the proposed activities would result in the injury or mortality of pinnipeds (and none have been recorded in the 28 years that the researcher has been conducting this research). The results of Dr. VanBlaricom's monitoring under the previous IHA are summarized in Table 1, which shows the numbers of each species present at Dr. VanBlaricom's survey sites as well as the numbers disturbed during his visits in the last year. As part of the required monitoring, Dr. VanBlaricom records the numbers of disturbed animals that flush into the water, the number that move more than 1 m, but do not enter the water, and the number that become alert and move, but do not move more than 1 m (see the application for these numbers). Animals that raised their head and looked at the researcher without moving were not considered disturbed (or harassed pursuant to the MMPA). For the purposes of estimating take in the IHA, NMFS conservatively estimates take as the total of all three categories of disturbed behavior recorded. As indicated in Table 1, approximately 50 percent of the total animals considered harassed by this activity in 2007 responded by flushing into the water (671 sea lions, 68 harbor seals, and 0 elephant seals) and the rest responded to a lesser degree by moving some distance on land when the researchers approached. Though the researchers have not stayed to find how soon pinnipeds return after flushing (leaving as soon as possible minimizes the effects), increasing numbers at some of the sites and pinniped presence at sites where they were not present before suggest that the research is not having any long-term detrimental effects on the population of any of these three species. Older, weaned sea lion pups and juveniles were seen and disturbed at site 8, and a small number
(5)were flushed into the water, but none were known to be injured in any way. Year Month Date Site # California Sea Lions Present at site Disturbed Pacific Harbor Seals Present at site Disturbed Northern Elephant Seals Present at site Disturbed 2007 January 19 1 61 50 0 0 6 1 2007 January 20 1 58 51 0 0 6 0 2007 October 27 1 88 76 0 0 0 0 2007 January 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007 January 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007 February 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007 February 17 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007 October 26 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007 January 18 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007 January 29 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007 February 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007 February 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007 February 16 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007 October 26 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007 October 28 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007 January 21 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007 February 1 4 2 2 0 0 0 0 2007 February 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007 October 25 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007 January 30 5 79 43 33 15 42 0 2007 January 4 6 306 161 53 31 57 0 2007 January 30 6 271 130 39 22 291 0 2007 February 14 7 130 94 8 0 41 0 2007 February 15 7 237 226 0 0 8 0 2007 January 17 8 168 131 0 0 8 0 2007 January 31 8 330 225 0 0 9 0 2007 October 24 8 103 92 0 0 0 0 2007 February 18 8 65 35 0 0 0 0 2007 January 3 9 0 0 0 0 3 1 2007 January 5 9 1 1 0 0 3 0 2007 February 16 9 0 0 0 0 6 0 Totals 1899 1317 133 68 480 2 671 68 # that flushed into water (51%) (100%) 0 458 # moved >1m, but not into water (35%) 0 2 (100%) 188 # came alert, but did not move >1 m (14%) 0 0 Table 1. Results from 2006-2007 monitoring. Number of “disturbed” animals indicates total of the three categories of recorded reactions, which include: animals that flushed into the water; animals that moved more than 1 m, but did not enter the water; and, animals that moved or changed direction, but did not move more than 1 m. Mitigation Several mitigation measures to reduce the potential for harassment from population assessment research surveys will be implemented as part of the SNI abalone research activities. Primarily, mitigation of the risk of disturbance to pinnipeds requires that researchers are judicious in the route of approach to abalone study sites, avoiding close contact with pinnipeds hauled out on shore. In no case will marine mammals be deliberately approached by abalone survey personnel, and in all cases every possible measure will be taken to select a pathway of approach to study sites that minimizes the number of marine mammals harassed. Each visit to a given study site will last for a maximum of 4 hours, after which the site is vacated and can be re-occupied by any hauled marine mammals that may have been disturbed by the presence of abalone researchers. The potential risk of injury or mortality will be avoided with the following measures. Disturbances to females with dependent pups (in the cases of California sea lions and Pacific harbor seals) will be mitigated to the greatest extent practicable by avoiding visits to the four black abalone study sites with resident pinnipeds during periods of breeding and lactation from mid-February through mid-October. During this period, abalone research will be confined to the other five sites where pinniped breeding and post-partum nursing does not occur. Limiting visits to the four breeding and lactation sites (5, 6, 7, and 8) to periods when these activities do not occur (second half of October, November, December, January, and the first half of February) will reduce the possibility of incidental harassment and the potential for injury or mortality of dependent California sea lion pups and Pacific harbor seal pups to near zero. Northern elephant seal pups are present at four sites during winter months. Risks of injury or mortality of elephant seal pups by mother/pup separation or trampling are limited to the period from January through March when pups are born, nursed, and weaned, ending about 30 days post-weaning when pups depart land for foraging areas at sea. However, elephant seals have a much higher tolerance of nearby human activity than sea lions or harbor seals. Also, elephant seal pupping typically occurs on the sandy beaches at SNI, approximately 50 m (164 ft) or more away from the abalone study sites. Possible take of northern elephant seal pups will be minimized by using a very careful approach to the study sites and avoiding the proximity of hauled seals and any seal pups during collection of abalone population data. One individual Guadalupe fur seal was seen at study site 8 on two separate occasions during the summer months in the mid-1980's. Since the original sightings, no individuals of this species have been seen during abalone research. However, to ensure that Guadalupe fur seals are not affected by these activities and that authorization is not needed pursuant to the MMPA or the ESA, researchers will only visit site 8 from mid-October through mid-February with a single proposed visit in July, and work will be immediately suspended and researchers vacated if an individual is seen. Guadalupe fur seals are distinctive in appearance and behavior, and can be readily identified at a distance without any disturbance. Sea otters, which are federally listed as threatened under the ESA and managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), are not expected ashore during the time periods when the research activities would be conducted. However, if sea otters are sighted ashore during the abalone research, Dr. VanBlaricom would follow similar procedures in place for fur seals to avoid impacts, suspending research activities in any areas California sea otters are occupying. Monitoring Currently, all biological research activities at SNI are subject to approval and regulation by the Environmental Planning and Management Department (EPMD), U.S. Navy. The U.S. Navy owns SNI and closely regulates all civilian access to, and activity on, the island, including biological research. Therefore, monitoring activities will be closely coordinated with Navy marine mammal biologists located on SNI. In addition, status and trends of pinniped aggregations at SNI are monitored by the NMFS Southwest Fisheries Science Center (SWFSC). Also, long-term studies of pinniped population dynamics, migratory and foraging behavior, and foraging ecology at SNI are conducted by staff at Hubbs-Sea World Research Institute (HSWRI). Monitoring requirements in relation to Dr. VanBlaricom's abalone research surveys will include observations made by the applicant and his associates. Information recorded will include species counts (with numbers of pups), numbers of observed disturbances, and descriptions of the disturbance behaviors during the abalone surveys. Observations of unusual behaviors, numbers, or distributions of pinnipeds on SNI will be reported to EPMD, NMFS, and HSWRI so that any potential follow-up observations can be conducted by the appropriate personnel. In addition, observations of tag-bearing pinniped carcasses as well as any rare or unusual species of marine mammals will be reported to EPMD and NMFS. If at any time injury or death of any marine mammal occurs that may be a result of the proposed abalone research, Dr. VanBlaricom will suspend research activities and contact NMFS immediately to determine how best to proceed to ensure that another injury or death does not occur and to ensure that the applicant remains in compliance with the MMPA. Reporting A draft final report must be submitted to NMFS within 60 days after the conclusion of the year-long field season or 90 days prior to the start of the next field season if a new IHA will be pursued. The report will include a summary of the information gathered pursuant to the monitoring requirements set forth in the IHA. A final report must be submitted to the Regional Administrator of the Southwest Region within 30 days after receiving comments from NMFS on the draft final report. If no comments are received from NMFS, the draft final report will be considered to be the final report. Dr. VanBlaricom has already submitted the final report required by the 2007 IHA and it may be viewed on the NMFS website (see ADDRESSES ). Numbers of Marine Mammals Expected to be Harassed The distribution of pinnipeds hauled out on beaches is not even between sites or at different times of the year. The number of marine mammals disturbed will vary by month and location, and, compared to animals hauled out on the beach farther away from survey activity, only those animals hauled out closest to the actual survey transect plots contained within each research site are likely to be disturbed by the presence of researchers and alter their behavior or attempt to move out of the way. Table 2 depicts the total numbers of animals encountered and disturbed by Level B Harassment in Dr. VanBlaricom's 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007 abalone survey field seasons. As discussed earlier, NMFS considers an animal to have been harassed if it moved any distance in response to the researcher's presence or if the animal was already moving and changed direction. Animals that raised their head and looked at the researcher without moving were not considered harassed. Based on past observations and assuming a maximum level of incidental harassment of marine mammals at each site during periods of visitation, NMFS estimates that the maximum total possible numbers of individuals that will be incidentally harassed during the effective dates of the proposed IHA would be 1610 California sea lions, 100 Pacific harbor seals, and 20 northern elephant seals may be taken by harassment as a result of this activity. NMFS has determined that the estimated number of takes of California sea lions, Pacific harbor seals and northern elephant seals are small numbers relative to the approximate total population of each pinniped species (1.2, 0.3, and .03 percent of the minimum population, respectively). Year California Sea Lions Present around Site Est. Harassed Pacific Harbor Seals Present around Site Est. Harassed Northern Elephant Seals Present around Site Est. Harassed 2004 2239 1472 108 99 562 7 2005 1383 983 99 88 409 9 2006 1564 1045 57 50 623 14 2007 1899 1317 133 68 480 2 Table 2. Estimated number of each species harassed over the last four years of abalone research. Minimum population estimates for California sea lions, Pacific harbor seals, and Northern elephant seals are 138881, 31600, and 60547, respectively. Potential Effects of Activities on Marine Mammal Habitat NMFS anticipates that the action will result in no impacts to marine mammal habitat beyond rendering the areas immediately around each of the nine study sites less desirable as haul-out sites for a total of 8.5 hours per year. Three visits to each site are anticipated during the year-long validity of the IHA. ESA For the reasons already described in this **Federal Register** Notice, NMFS has determined that the described abalone research and the accompanying IHA will have no effect on species or critical habitat protected under the ESA (specifically, the Guadalupe fur seal). Therefore, consultation under Section 7 is not required. National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)NMFS prepared an Environmental Assessment
(EA)of the Issuance of an IHA to Take Marine Mammals, by Harassment, During Black Abalone Research at SNI, California, which analyzed the issuance of multiple IHAs over several years for these activities, and subsequently issued a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) on November 21, 2005. The proposed 2008 action is the same as was analyzed in the 2005 EA and the EA remains applicable. A copy of the EA and FONSI are available upon request (see ADDRESSES ). Conclusions Based on Dr. VanBlaricom's application and monitoring reports for previous field seasons, as well as the analysis contained herein, NMFS has determined that the impact of the described abalone research at SNI will result, at most, in a temporary modification in behavior by small numbers of California sea lions, Pacific harbor seals, and northern elephant seals, in the form of head alerts, movement away from the researchers and/or flushing from the beach. In addition, no take by injury or death is anticipated, and take by harassment will be at the lowest level practicable due to incorporation of the mitigation measures mentioned previously in this document. NMFS has further preliminarily determined that the anticipated takes will have a negligible impact on the affected species. Authorization NMFS has issued an IHA to Dr. Glenn R. VanBlaricom for the harassment of California sea lions, Pacific harbor seals, and northern elephant seals incidental to black abalone population trend research, provided the previously mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated. Dated: January 22, 2008. P. Michael Payne, Chief, Permits, Conservation and Education Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E8-1429 Filed 1-25-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XF22 Marine Mammals; File No. 775-1875 AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice; issuance of permit. SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the Northeast Fisheries Science Center (NEFSC), National Marine Fisheries Service [Dr. Nancy Thompson, Responsible Party], 166 Water Street, Woods Hole, MA 02543, has been issued a permit to conduct research on, and import/export specimens collected from, marine mammals. ADDRESSES: The permit and related documents are available for review upon written request or by appointment in the following offices: Permits, Conservation and Education Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Room 13705, Silver Spring, MD 20910; phone (301)713-2289; fax (301)427-2521; Northeast Region, NMFS, One Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930-2298; phone (978)281-9300; fax (978)281-9394; and Southeast Region, NMFS, 263 13th Avenue South, Saint Petersburg, Florida 33701; phone (727)824-5312; fax (727)824-5309. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brandy Belmas or Carrie Hubard, (301)713-2289. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On January 10, 2007, notice was published in the **Federal Register** (72 FR 1218) that a request for a scientific research permit to take seven species of baleen whales, twenty-five species/stocks of odontocetes, and four species of pinnipeds, including the following endangered species: sperm whale (Physeter macrocephalus), sei whale (Balaenoptera borealis), blue whale (B. musculus), fin whale (B. physalus), humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae), and right whale (Eubalaena glacialis), had been submitted by the above-named organization. The requested permit has been issued under the authority of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 *et seq.* ), the regulations governing the taking and importing of marine mammals (50 CFR part 216), the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 *et seq.* ), and the regulations governing the taking, importing, and exporting of endangered and threatened species (50 CFR parts 222-226). This research permit authorizes aerial and vessel surveys to be conducted including close approach, photo-id, and incidental harassment of cetaceans. Level A activities include biopsy sampling and suction-cup tagging, which will be conducted on all age classes with the exception of neonates. Additionally, researchers are authorized to capture, biological sample, incidentally harass, and release four species of pinnipeds. Pinniped research would be conducted on all age classes including pups. The study area for this permit includes waters within or proximal to the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone from Maine to Florida. Finally, researchers are authorized to import and export cetacean and pinniped specimens (including soft and hard tissue, blood, extracted DNA, whole dead animals, etc.) to/from any country. In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 *et seq.* ), an environmental assessment was prepared analyzing the effects of the permitted activities. After a Finding of No Significant Impact, the determination was made that it was not necessary to prepare an environmental impact statement. Issuance of this permit, as required by the ESA, was based on a finding that such permit:
(1)was applied for in good faith;
(2)will not operate to the disadvantage of such endangered species; and
(3)is consistent with the purposes and policies set forth in section 2 of the ESA. Dated: January 22, 2008. P. Michael Payne, Chief, Permits, Conservation and Education Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E8-1431 Filed 1-25-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN: 0648-XF30 New England Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice; public meeting. SUMMARY: The New England Fishery Management Council's (Council) Groundfish Committee will meet to consider actions affecting New England fisheries in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ). DATES: The meeting will be held on Monday, February 11, 2008, at 9 am. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Courtyard by Marriot, 1000 Market Street, Portsmouth NH 03801; telephone:
(603)436-2121. *Council address* : New England Fishery Management Council, 50 Water Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul J. Howard, Executive Director, New England Fishery Management Council; telephone: (978)465-0492. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Groundfish Oversight Committee will meet to continue development of Amendment 16 to the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Management Plan (FMP). Amendment 16 is being developed to continue the rebuilding of groundfish stocks and will be implemented May 1, 2009. The Committee will develop a recommendation for Annual Catch Limits (ACLs), review plan development team recommendations for effort controls, and may address sector management issues. The Committee may also develop additional recommendations for Amendment 16 that will be considered by the Council at a meeting on February 13 and 14. Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this group for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically identified in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take final action to address the emergency. Special Accommodations This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Paul J. Howard (see ADDRESSES ) at least 5 days prior to the meeting date. Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 *et seq.* Dated: January 23, 2008. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E8-1423 Filed 1-25-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN: 0648-XF31 New England Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice of a public meeting. SUMMARY: The New England Fishery Management Council (Council) will hold a three-day Council meeting on February 12-14, 2008, to consider actions affecting New England fisheries in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ). DATES: The meeting will be held on Tuesday, February 12 beginning at 9 a.m., and Wednesday and Thursday, February 13-14, beginning at 8:30 a.m. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Sheraton Harborside Hotel, 250 Market Street, Portsmouth, NH 03801; telephone:
(603)431-2300. *Council address* : New England Fishery Management Council, 50 Water Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul J. Howard, Executive Director, New England Fishery Management Council; telephone:
(978)465-0492. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 Following introductions and any announcements the Council will receive a series of brief reports from the Council Chairman and Executive Director, the NOAA Fisheries Northeast Regional Administrator, Northeast Fisheries Science Center and Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council liaisons, NOAA General Counsel, NOAA Enforcement and representatives of the U.S. Coast Guard and the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission. The Council also will review and approve a scoping document for Amendment 15 to the Sea Scallop Fishery Management Plan (FMP). Issues that are likely to be included are annual catch limits and accountability measures, measures to address excess capacity and allow sectors in the limited access scallop fishery and reconsideration of the current scallop overfishing definition. Following an brief opportunity for the public to address items that are otherwise not listed on the Council agenda, there will be a final review of several Council policies concerning enforcement, advisory panels and sectors. The day will conclude with an update on the development of the Amendment 3 to the Skate FMP. Wednesday, February 13, 2008 The Council's Research Steering Committee Chairman will recommend approval of comments on the NMFS proposed rule that would revise the experimental fishery permit process and ask for consideration and approval of Council research priorities for 2008. The Council also will review the findings of the committee concerning any cooperative research final reports they have reviewed. As a separate agenda item, the Council will consider commenting on any current experimental fishery permit applications. The Habitat Committee will review and discuss its recommendations on the previously designated Southern Canyon Habitat Areas of Particular Concern (HAPCs) and possibly ask for approval of any modifications to those HAPCs. The last item of the day will involve review and approval of a process to consider additional gears for use in the Northeast Multispecies (Groundfish) Regular B Days-at-Sea Program and the U.S./Canada Haddock Special Access Program. The Council also will review and approve an annual catch limit alternative for Amendment 16 to the Northeast Multispecies FMP. Thursday, February 14, 2008 Groundfish issues will be covered throughout the final day of the meeting and will include consideration and approval of alternatives to be analyzed for Amendment 16 to the Northeast Multispecies FMP, including but not limited to effort controls, sector administration, research set-asides, annual catch limits and accountability measures and allowing vessels to possess both a limited access scallop and a groundfish permit. Although other non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this Council for discussion, those issues may not be the subjects of formal action during this meeting. Council action will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, provided that the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take final action to address the emergency. Special Accommodations This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Paul J. Howard (see ADDRESSES ) at least 5 days prior to the meeting date. Dated: January 23, 2008. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E8-1424 Filed 1-25-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Patent and Trademark Office Recording Assignments ACTION: Proposed collection; comment request. SUMMARY: The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the continuing information collection, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). DATES: Written comments must be submitted on or before March 28, 2008. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods: *E-mail: Susan.Fawcett@uspto.gov.* Include “0651-0027 comment” in the subject line of the message. *Fax:* 571-273-0112, marked to the attention of Susan Fawcett. *Mail:* Susan K. Fawcett, Records Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer, Customer Information Services Group, Public Information Services Division, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information should be directed to Joyce R. Johnson, Manager, Assignment Division, Mail Stop 1450, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450; by telephone at 703-308-9706; or by e-mail at *Joyce.Johnson@uspto.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Abstract This collection of information is required by 35 U.S.C. 261 and 262 for patents and 15 U.S.C. 1057 and 1060 of the Trademark Act of 1946 for trademarks. These statutes authorize the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to record patent and trademark assignment documents, including transfers of properties (i.e. patents and trademarks), liens, licenses, assignments of interest, security interests, mergers, and explanations of transactions or other documents that record the transfer of ownership of a particular patent or trademark property from one party to another. Assignments are recorded for applications, patents, and trademark registrations. The USPTO administers these statutes through 37 CFR 2.146, 2.171, and 37 CFR Part 3. These rules permit the public, corporations, other federal agencies, and Government-owned or Government-controlled corporations to submit patent and trademark assignment documents and other documents related to title transfers to the USPTO to be recorded. In accordance with 37 CFR 3.54, the recording of an assignment document by the USPTO is an administrative action and not a determination of the validity of the document or of the effect that the document has on the title to an application, patent, or trademark. Once the assignment documents are recorded, they are available for public inspection. The only exceptions are those documents that are sealed under secrecy orders according to 37 CFR 3.58 or related to unpublished patent applications maintained in confidence under 35 U.S.C. 122 and 37 CFR 1.14. The public uses these records to conduct ownership and chain-of-title searches. The public may view these records either at the USPTO Public Search Facilities or at the National Archives and Records Administration, depending on the date they were recorded. The public may also search patent and trademark assignment information online through the USPTO Web site. In order to file a request to record an assignment, the respondent must submit an appropriate cover sheet along with copies of the assignment documents to be recorded. The USPTO provides two paper forms for this purpose, the Patent Recordation Form Cover Sheet (PTO-1595) and the Trademark Recordation Form Cover Sheet (PTO-1594), which capture all of the necessary data for accurately recording various assignment documents. Customers may also submit assignments online by using the Electronic Patent Assignment System
(EPAS)and the Electronic Trademark Assignment System (ETAS), which are available through the USPTO Web site. These systems allow customers to fill out the required cover sheet information online using web-based forms and then attach the electronic assignment documents to be submitted for recordation. Previously, customers could also submit patent assignment recordation requests securely over the internet using special electronic filing software that was developed by the USPTO. Particularly large recordation requests that were prepared using the software could be copied onto a recordable compact disc
(CD)and then submitted to the USPTO by mail. Since the USPTO has retired this electronic filing software in favor of the web-based filing system, the corresponding modes of submission are being deleted from this collection. II. Method of Collection By mail, facsimile, hand delivery, or electronically to the USPTO. III. Data *OMB Number:* 0651-0027. *Form Number(s):* PTO-1594 and PTO-1595. *Type of Review:* Revision of a currently approved collection. *Affected Public:* Individuals or households; businesses or other for-profits; not-for-profit institutions; the Federal Government; and state, local or tribal governments. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 363,388 responses per year. *Estimated Time per Response:* The USPTO estimates that it will take the public approximately 30 minutes (0.5 hours) to prepare and submit a patent or trademark assignment recordation request. *Estimated Total Annual Respondent Burden Hours:* 181,695 hours per year. *Estimated Total Annual Respondent Cost Burden:* $35,793,915 per year. The USPTO expects that the information in this collection will be prepared by both attorneys and paralegals. The estimated rate of $197 per hour used in this collection is an average of the paraprofessional rate of $90 per hour and the professional rate of $304 per hour for associate attorneys in private firms. Using the average rate of $197 per hour, the USPTO estimates that the respondent cost burden for submitting the information in this collection will be $35,793,915 per year. Item Form number Estimated time for response (minutes) Estimated annual responses Estimated annual burden hours Patent Recordation Form Cover Sheet PTO-1595 30 130,387 65,194 Trademark Recordation Form Cover Sheet PTO-1594 30 4,584 2,292 Electronic Patent Assignment System
(EPAS)PTO-1595 30 203,969 101,985 Electronic Trademark Assignment System
(ETAS)PTO-1594 30 24,448 12,224 Totals 363,388 181,695 *Estimated Total Annual Non-hour Respondent Cost Burden:* $27,165,603 per year. There are no maintenance costs associated with this information collection. However, this collection does have annual (non-hour) costs in the form of filing fees, recordkeeping costs, and postage costs. This collection has filing fees associated with submitting patent and trademark assignment documents to be recorded. The filing fees for recording patent and trademark assignments are the same for both paper and electronic submissions. However, the filing cost for recording patent or trademark assignments varies according to the number of properties involved in each submission. The filing fee for submitting a patent assignment as indicated by 37 CFR 1.21(h) is $40 for recording each property in a document, while the filing fee for submitting a trademark assignment as indicated by 37 CFR 2.6(b)(6) is $40 for recording the first property in a document and $25 for each additional property in the same document. The USPTO estimates that the average fee for a patent assignment recordation request is approximately $65 and that the average fee for a trademark assignment recordation request is approximately $184. Therefore, this collection has an estimated total of $27,075,028 in filing fees per year. Item Form number Estimated annual responses Average fee amount Estimated annual filing costs Patent Recordation Form Cover Sheet PTO-1595 130,387 $65.00 $8,475,155.00 Trademark Recordation Form Cover Sheet PTO-1594 4,584 184.00 843,456.00 Electronic Patent Assignment System
(EPAS)PTO-1595 203,969 65.00 13,257,985.00 Electronic Trademark Assignment System
(ETAS)PTO-1594 24,448 184.00 4,498,432.00 Totals 363,388 27,075,028.00 There are also recordkeeping costs associated with submitting assignment documents online using EPAS and ETAS. The USPTO recommends that customers print and retain a copy of the acknowledgment receipt that appears on the screen after a successful submission. Customers will also receive an electronic copy of this receipt. The USPTO estimates that it will take 5 seconds (0.001 hours) to print a copy of the acknowledgment receipt and that approximately 228,417 submissions per year will be completed via EPAS and ETAS, for a total of approximately 228 hours per year for printing this receipt. The USPTO expects that these receipts will be printed by paraprofessionals at an estimated rate of $90 per hour, for a recordkeeping cost of $20,520 per year. Customers may incur postage costs when submitting a patent or trademark assignment request to the USPTO by mail. The USPTO expects that some assignment requests will be submitted by fax but that approximately 87,569 of the 134,971 paper assignment requests per year will be submitted by mail. The USPTO estimates that the average first-class postage cost for a mailed Patent or Trademark Recordation Form Cover Sheet submission is 80 cents, resulting in a total postage cost for this collection of $70,055 per year. The total non-hour respondent cost burden for this collection in the form of filing fees, recordkeeping costs, and postage costs is estimated to be $27,165,603 per year. IV. Request for Comments Comments are invited on:
(a)Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility;
(b)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information;
(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, e.g., the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized or included in the request for OMB approval of this information collection; they also will become a matter of public record. Dated: January 22, 2008. Susan K. Fawcett, Records Officer, USPTO, Office of the Chief Information Officer, Customer Information Services Group, Public Information Services Division. [FR Doc. E8-1389 Filed 1-25-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-16-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Patent and Trademark Office Privacy Act of 1974; System of Records AGENCY: United States Patent and Trademark Office, Commerce. ACTION: Notice of proposed new Privacy Act system of records. SUMMARY: In accordance with the requirements of the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) gives notice of a proposed new system of records entitled “COMMERCE/PAT-TM-21 National Medal of Technology and Innovation Nominations.” We invite the public to comment on the system announced in this publication. DATES: Written comments must be received no later than February 27, 2008. The proposed system of records will be effective on February 27, 2008, unless the USPTO receives comments that would result in a contrary determination. ADDRESSES: You may submit written comments by any of the following methods: E-mail: *Susan.Fawcett@uspto.gov.* Fax:
(571)273-0112, marked to the attention of Susan Fawcett. Mail: Susan K. Fawcett, Records Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer, Customer Information Services Group, Public Information Services Division, United States Patent and Trademark Office, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450. All comments received will be available for public inspection at the Public Search Facilities, Madison East—1st Floor, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, VA 22314. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan K. Fawcett, Records Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer, Customer Information Services Group, Public Information Services Division, United States Patent and Trademark Office, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450,
(571)272-5429. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The National Medal of Technology is the highest honor awarded by the President of the United States to America's leading innovators. Established by an act of Congress in 1980, the Medal of Technology was first awarded in 1985. The Medal is given annually to individuals, teams, and/or companies/divisions for their outstanding contributions to the Nation's economic, environmental and social well-being through the development and commercialization of technology products, processes and concepts; technological innovation; and development of the Nation's technological workforce. The purpose of the National Medal of Technology is to recognize those who have made lasting contributions to America's competitiveness, standard of living, and quality of life through technological innovation, and to recognize those who have made substantial contributions to strengthening the Nation's technological workforce. By highlighting the national importance of technological innovation, the Medal also seeks to inspire future generations of Americans to prepare for and pursue technical careers to keep America at the forefront of global technology and economic leadership. The America Competes Act of 2007 abolished the Technology Administration of the Department of Commerce as of August 9, 2007 (sec. 3002). The administration and nomination processing for the National Medal of Technology has been officially transferred by the Secretary of Commerce to the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). In addition, the title of the award will be updated to the “National Medal of Technology and Innovation.” The USPTO is therefore giving notice of a new system of records that is subject to the Privacy Act of 1974. The proposed system of records will maintain information on individuals who are nominated for the National Medal of Technology and Innovation. The proposed new system of records, “COMMERCE/PAT-TM-21 National Medal of Technology and Innovation Nominations,” is published in its entirety below. COMMERCE/PAT-TM-21 System name: National Medal of Technology and Innovation Nominations. Security classification: Unclassified. System location: Office of the Under Secretary and Director, United States Patent and Trademark Office, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, VA 22314. Categories of individuals covered by the system: Nominees for the National Medal of Technology and Innovation. Categories of records in the system: Nomination Form, including name, postal address, telephone number, e-mail address, citizenship, employment history, and other information pertaining to the applicant's activities. Statements containing various kind of information with respect to the contributions of the individual(s) and/or group(s). Authority for maintenance of the system: 15 U.S.C. 3711. Purpose(s): The information in this system of records is used by the Nomination Evaluation Committee to determine the eligibility and merit of nominees during the annual selection of the recipients of the National Medal of Technology and Innovation. Routine uses of records maintained in the system, including categories of users and the purposes of such uses: See Prefatory Statement of General Routine Uses Nos. 1-5, 9-10, and 12-13, as found at 46 FR 63501-63502 (December 31, 1981). The USPTO may use the information contained in this system of records in support of the work of the nomination committee. The USPTO, the Department of Commerce, the National Medal of Technology Nomination Evaluation Committee, and White House staff may use the information contained in this system of records in support of the nomination and award process. The Committee will discuss the achievements and biographical information submitted (contact information will not be disclosed) at meetings that are open to the public in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act. Disclosure to consumer reporting agencies: Not applicable. Policies and practices for storing, retrieving, accessing, retaining, and disposing of records in the system: Storage: Paper records in file folders and electronic media. Retrievability: By individual's name. Safeguards: Maintained in areas accessible only to authorized personnel in a building protected by security guards during nonbusiness hours. Systems are password protected. Retention and disposal: Records retention and disposal is in accordance with the series record schedules. System manager(s) and address: Under Secretary and Director, United States Patent and Trademark Office, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, VA 22314. Notification procedure: Information may be obtained from the Manager, National Medal of Technology and Innovation, Office of the Under Secretary and Director, United States Patent and Trademark Office, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450. Requesters should provide their names in accordance with the inquiry provisions appearing in 37 CFR part 102 subpart B. Record access procedures: Requests from individuals should be addressed to the same address as stated in the notification section above. Contesting record procedures: The rules for access, contesting contents, and appealing initial determinations by the individual concerned appear in 37 CFR part 102 subpart B. Requests from individuals should be addressed to the same address as stated in the notification section above. Record source categories: Subject individuals and those authorized by the individual to furnish information, as well as nominating entities and self-nominees. Exemptions claimed for the system: None. Dated: January 22, 2008. Susan K. Fawcett, Records Officer, USPTO, Office of the Chief Information Officer, Customer Information Services Group, Public Information Services Division. [FR Doc. E8-1386 Filed 1-25-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-16-P DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary of Defense Establishment of Department of Defense Federal Advisory Committees AGENCY: DoD. ACTION: Establishment of Federal Advisory Committee. SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972, (5 U.S.C. Appendix, as amended), the Sunshine in the Government Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and 41 CFR 102-3.65, the Department of Defense gives notice that it is establishing the U.S. Nuclear Command and Control System Comprehensive Review Committee (hereafter referred to as the Committee). The Committee is a discretionary federal advisory committee established under the authority of 41 CFR 102-3.50(d) to provide the Secretary of Defense, in his capacity as the Nuclear Command and control System Executive Agent, a comprehensive review of the U.S. Nuclear Command and Control System (NCCS). The Committee, considering the impact advanced technology, current and emerging threats, and evolving vulnerabilities have on the Nuclear Command and Control System, shall: A. Examine the full range of NCCS policies, procedures, responsibilities, functions, capabilities, management and oversight necessary to: 1. Meet national and department/agency policy and guidance; and 2. Maintain the highest standards required for planning, directing, and controlling nuclear weapons, weapons systems, and associated operations. B. Recommend changes to NCCS policies, responsibilities, functions, capabilities, management structures, and oversight mechanisms, as well as identifying other enhancements to NCCS elements (facilities, equipment, personnel, communications and procedures). The Committee's review shall not address nuclear force size and structure, deterrence strategy, and arms control/threat reduction analyses. The Committee shall be composed of a chairperson and no more than five distinguished members, who diverse expertise and background enable them to provide recommendations for improving the National Command and Control System to the NCCS Executive Agent. The Committee members shall be appointed by the Secretary of Defense for the duration of the Committee, and their appointments will be renewed on an annual basis. Those members, who are not full-time Federal officers or employees, shall serve as Special Government Employees under the authority of 5 U.S.C. 3109. Committee members, with the exception of travel and per diem for official travel, shall serve without compensation. The Secretary of Defense shall select the Committee's Chairperson. The Committee shall be authorized to establish subcommittees, as necessary and consistent with its mission, and these subcommittees or working groups shall operate under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972, the Sunshine in the Government Act of 1976, and other appropriate federal regulations. Such subcommittees or workgroups shall not work independently of the chartered Committee, and shall report all their recommendations and advice to the Committee for full deliberation and discussion. Subcommittees or workgroups have no authority to make decisions on behalf of the chartered Committee nor can they report directly to the Department of Defense or any federal officers or employees who are not Committee Members. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Committee shall meet at the call of the Committee's Designated Federal Officer, in consultation with the Committee's chairperson. The Designated Federal Officer, pursuant to DoD policy, shall be a full-time or permanent part-time DoD employee, and shall be appointed in accordance with established DoD policies and procedures. The Designated Federal Officer or duly appointed Alternate Designated Federal Officer shall attend all committee meetings and subcommittee meetings. Pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.105(j) and 102-3.140, the public or interested organizations may submit written statements to the U.S. Nuclear Command and Control System Comprehensive Review Committee membership about the Committee's mission and functions. Written statements may be submitted at any time or in response to the stated agenda of planned meeting of the U.S. Nuclear Command and Control System Comprehensive Review Committee. All written statements shall be submitted to the Designated Federal Officer for the U.S. Nuclear Command and Control System Comprehensive Review Committee, and this individual will ensure that the written statements are provided to the membership for their consideration. Contact information for the U.S. Nuclear Command and Control System Comprehensive Review Committee's Designated Federal Officer, once appointed, may be obtained from the GSA's FACA Database— *https://www.fido.gov/facadatabase/public.asp* . The Designated Federal Officer, pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.150, will announce planned meetings of the U.S. Nuclear Command and Control System Comprehensive Review Committee. The Designated Federal Officer, at that time, may provide additional guidance on the submission of written statements that are in response to the stated agenda for the planned meeting in question. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Contact Jim Freeman, Deputy Committee Management Officer for the Department of Defense, 703-601-2554, extension 128. Dated: January 22, 2008. L.M. Bynum, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense. [FR Doc. E8-1390 Filed 1-25-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Army [USA-2008-0002] Office of the Secretary; Privacy Act of 1974; System of Records AGENCY: Army Review Boards Agency, DOD. ACTION: Notice to amend a system of records. SUMMARY: The Army Review Boards Agency
(ARBA)is amending A0015-185 SFMR systems of records notice in its existing inventory of record systems subject to the Privacy Act of 1974, (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended. DATES: This action will be effective without further notice on February 27, 2008 unless comments are received that would result in a contrary determination. ADDRESSES: Army Review Boards Agency, 1901 South Bell Street, 2nd Floor, Arlington, VA, 22202-4508. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Robert Dickerson at
(703)428-6513. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Army's notices for systems of records subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, have been published in the **Federal Register** and are available from the address above. The specific changes to the record system being amended are set forth below followed by the notice, as amended, published in its entirety. The proposed amendment is not within the purview of subsection
(r)of the Privacy Act of 1974, (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, which requires the submission of a new or altered system report. Dated: January 22, 2007. L.M. Bynum, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense. *Changes:* A0015-185 SFMR System name: Correction of Military Records Cases (April 9, 1998, 63 FR 17388). System location: Change address to “1901 South Bell Street, 2nd Floor, Arlington, VA 22202-4508.” Categories of individuals covered by the system: Change entry to “Present or former members of the U.S. Army, U.S. Army Reserve or Army National Guard or their authorized representatives who apply for the correction of his/her military records and review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of the United States.” Categories of records in the system: Change entry to “Application for Correction of Military Records (DD Form 149), Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of the United States (DD 293), Individual's name (first and last), address, telephone number, email, fax number, branch of service, rank, social security number (SSN), date of discharge, type of discharge, relevant information pertaining to discharge or military corrective action, counselor's name, counselor's address, counselor's phone number and email, documentary evidence, affidavits, information from individual's military record pertinent to corrective action requested, testimony, hearing transcripts when appropriate, briefs/arguments, advisory opinions, findings, conclusions and decisional documents of the Board.” Authority for maintenance of the system: Add to entry “10 U.S.C. 1552, Correction of military records: claims incident thereto.” Policies and practices for storing, retrieving, accessing, retaining, and disposing of records in the system: Storage: Change entry to “Paper records in file folders and in electronic storage media.” Retrievability: Change entry to “Applicant's surname, Social Security Number
(SSN)and/or number assigned to applicant.” Safeguards: Change entry to “Information is privileged, and restricted to individuals who have a need for the record in the performance of their official duties. Computer terminals with access to the records are located in rooms with authorized personnel. These rooms are locked when unoccupied. Common Access Card
(CAC)certificates and PIN, or login and passwords are used to support the minimum requirements of accountability, access control, least privilege, and data integrity. Additionally, intrusion detection systems, malicious code protection, and firewalls are used.” System manager(s) and address: Change entry to “Director, Army Review Boards Agency, 1901 South Bell Street, 2nd Floor, Arlington, VA 22202-4508.” Notification procedure: Change address to “Director, Army Review Boards Agency, 1901 South Bell Street, 2nd Floor, Arlington, VA 22202-4508.” Record access procedures: Change address to “Director, Army Review Boards Agency, 1901 South Bell Street, 2nd Floor, Arlington, VA 22202-4508.” A0015-185 SFMR System name: Correction of Military Records Cases System location: Army Review Boards Agency, 1901 South Bell Street, 2nd Floor, Arlington, VA 22202-4508. Copy of Board decision is incorporated in petitioner's Official Military Personnel File except where such action would nullify relief granted, in which case application and decision are retained in files of the Correction Board. Categories of individuals covered by the system: Present or former members of the U.S. Army, U.S. Army Reserve or Army National Guard or their authorized representatives who apply for the correction of his/her military records and review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of the United States. Categories of records in the system: Application for Correction of Military Record (DD Form 149), Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of the United States (DD 293), individual's name (first and last), address, telephone number, email, fax number, branch of service, rank, social security number (SSN), date of discharge, type of discharge, relevant information pertaining to discharge or military corrective action, counselor's name, counselor's address, counselor's phone number and email, documentary evidence, affidavits, information from individual's military record pertinent to corrective action requested, testimony, hearing transcripts when appropriate, briefs/arguments, advisory opinions, findings, conclusions and decisional documents of the Board. Authority for maintenance of the system: 5 U.S.C. 301, Departmental Regulations; 10 U.S.C. 3013, Secretary of the Army; 10 U.S.C. 1552, Correction of military records: claims incident thereto; and E.O. 9397 (SSN). Purpose(s): Records are used by the Board to consider all applications properly before it to determine the existence of an error or an injustice. Routine uses of records maintained in the system, including categories of users and the purposes of such uses: In addition to those disclosures generally permitted under 5 U.S.C. 552a(b) of the Privacy Act, these records or information contained therein may specifically be disclosed outside the DoD as a routine use pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(b)(3) as follows: To the Department of Justice when cases are litigated. The ‘Blanket Routine Uses’ set forth at the beginning of the Army's compilation of systems of records notices also apply to this system. Policies and practices for storing, retrieving, accessing, retaining, and disposing of records in the system: Storage: Paper records in file folders and in electronic storage media. Retrievability: Applicant's surname, Social Security Number
(SSN)and/or number assigned to applicant. Safeguards: Information is privileged, and restricted to individuals who have a need for the record in the performance of their official duties. Computer terminals with access to the records are located in rooms with authorized personnel. These rooms are locked when unoccupied. Common Access Card
(CAC)certificates and PIN, or login and passwords are used to support the minimum requirements of accountability, access control, least privilege, and data integrity. Additionally, intrusion detection systems, malicious code protection, and firewalls are used. Retention and disposal: Records are retained at the Army Review Boards Agency for at least 6 months after case is closed and then retired to the National Personnel Records Center where they are retained for 20 years. System manager(s) and address: Director, Army Review Boards Agency, 1901 South Bell Street, 2nd Floor, Arlington, VA 22202-4508. Notification procedure: Individuals seeking to determine whether information about themselves is contained in this system should address written inquiries to the Director, Army Review Boards Agency, 1901 South Bell Street, 2nd Floor, Arlington, VA 22202-4508. Individual must furnish full name, Social Security Number, service number if assigned, current address and telephone number, information that will assist in locating the record, and signature. Record access procedures: Individuals seeking access to information about themselves contained in this system should address written inquiries to the Director, Army Review Boards Agency, 1901 South Bell Street, 2nd Floor, Arlington, VA 22202-4508. Individual must furnish full name, Social Security Number (SSN), service number if assigned, current address and telephone number, information that will assist in locating the record, and signature. Contesting record procedures: The Army's rules for accessing records, and for contesting contents and appealing initial agency determinations are contained in Army Regulation 340-21; 32 CFR part 505; or may be obtained from the system manager. Record source categories: From the individual, his/her Official Military Personnel File, other Army records/reports, relevant documents from any source. Exemptions claimed for the system: None. [FR Doc. 08-333 Filed 1-25-08; 8:45am]
Connectionstraces to 48
Traces to 48 documents
U.S. Code
CFR
101 references not yet in our index
  • 7 CFR 1951
  • 7 CFR 1709
  • 7 CFR 3017
  • 7 CFR 1
  • 7 CFR 3015
  • 7 CFR 1709.6
  • 7 CFR 1794
  • 7 CFR 15
  • 7 CFR 3016
  • 7 CFR 3018
  • 7 CFR 3019
  • 7 CFR 3052
  • 7 CFR 1703
  • 7 CFR 1703.143
  • 7 CFR 1703.133
  • 7 CFR 1703.103
  • 7 CFR 1703.102
  • 7 CFR 1703.125(g)
  • 7 CFR 1703.121
  • 7 CFR 1703.126(b)(4)
  • 7 CFR 1703.103(a)(2)
  • 7 CFR 1703.126(a)(2)
  • 7 CFR 1703.123(a)(11)
  • 7 CFR 1703.132(a)(5)
  • 7 CFR 1703.142(b)(3)
  • 7 CFR 1703.125
  • 7 CFR 1703.134
  • 7 CFR 1703.144
  • 7 CFR 3021
  • 7 CFR 1703.101(h)
  • 7 CFR 1703.101
  • 91 Stat. 1164
  • 7 CFR 1703.112
  • 7 USC 901-950aa
  • 7 CFR 1737
  • 7 CFR 1744
  • 7 CFR 1703.126
  • 7 CFR 1703.127
  • 7 CFR 1703.135
  • 7 CFR 1703.145
+ 61 more
Citation graph
cites case law
Notices
Proposed collection; comments requested
U.S.C.§ 918a
U.S.C.§ 450b
U.S.C.§ 1601
U.S.C.§ 913
U.S.C.§ 552
Fed. Reg.Notices
U.S.C.§ 950aaa
U.S.C.§ 3501
U.S.C.§ 1469a
F. Supp.132 F. Supp. 2d 1
F. Supp.688 F. Supp. 639
F. App'x865 F.2d 240
Cites 149 · 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.