41634 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 130 / Thursday, July 6, 2000 / Notices

Standards and Technology, 100 Bureau

Drive, Mail Stop 1004, Gaithersburg,

MD 20899–1004; telephone 301–975–

4720, fax 301–948–1224; or via email at

brian.belanger@nist.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Committee will advise the Director of

the National Institute of Standards and

Technology (NIST) on ATP programs,

plans, and policies.

The Committee will consist of not

fewer than six nor more than twelve

members appointed by the Director of

NIST and its membership will be

balanced to reflect the wide diversity of

technical disciplines and industrial

sectors represented in ATP projects.

The Committee will function solely as

an advisory body, in compliance with

the provisions of the Federal Advisory

Committee Act.

Authority: Federal Advisory Committee

Act: 5 U.S.C. App. 2 and General Services

Administration Rule: 41 CFR Subpart 101–

6.10.

Dated: June 26, 2000.

Karen H. Brown,

Deputy Director.

[FR Doc. 00–16987 Filed 7–5–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–13–M

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Institute of Standards and

Technology

[Docket No. 00609171–0171–01]

RIN 0693–ZA38

Manufacturing Extension Partnership

Program

AGENCY: National Institute of Standards

and Technology (NIST), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of availability of funds.

SUMMARY: The National Institute of

Standards and Technology invites

proposals from qualified organizations

for funding projects to provide

manufacturing extension services to

small- and medium-size manufacturers

in the United States. These projects

correspond to the Manufacturing

Technology Centers component of the

Manufacturing Extension Partnership

(MEP). This competition is for the

expansion of manufacturing extension

service capacity within 2 discrete

geographic areas in the United States.

The first area encompasses the entirety

of the state of Indiana. The second area

encompasses 17 counties in the

Southeast Ohio area; Athens, Delaware,

Fairfield, Fayette, Franklin, Hocking,

Licking, Logan, Madison, Meigs,

Monroe, Morgan, Noble, Perry,

Pickaway, Union, and Washington. The

competition is open to all organizations

meeting the eligibility requirements

provided herein. This includes existing

MEP manufacturing extension centers.

Manufacturing extension centers must

be affiliated with a U.S.-based not-forprofit institution or organization. MEP

interprets not-for-profit organizations to

include universities and state and local

governments. Applicants are required to

provide 50% or more of the operating

cost for providing these manufacturing

extension services in year 1 through 3

and an increasing percentage in year 4,

and in year 5 and beyond.

DATES: Proposals from qualified

applicants must be received at the

address below by no later than 5 p.m.

Eastern Standard Time (September 5,

200). Selection of awards will be made

in September 2000.

ADDRESSES: Applicants must submit one

signed original and three (3) copies of

their proposal along with a Standard

Form 424, 424–A, and 424–B (Rev 7/97),

Form CD–511 (Rev 7/91), and Form CD–

346 to the National Institute of

Standards and Technology,

Manufacturing Extension Partnership,

100 Bureau Drive, Stop 4800, Building

301, Room C100, Gaithersburg, MD

20899–4800. Plainly mark on the

outside of the package it contains a

manufacturing extension center

proposal.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

information regarding this

announcement, contact Margaret

Phillips of the Manufacturing Extension

Partnership by calling (301) 975–5020;

or by mailing information requests to

the National Institute of Standards and

Technology, Manufacturing Extension

Partnership, 100 Bureau Drive, Stop

4800, Building 301, Room C100,

Gaithersburg, MD 20899–4800.

Information packets, which include

background materials on MEP, existing

centers and the necessary application

forms, should be requested via a one

page fax sent to (301) 963–6556. Please

include name, organization, mailing

address, telephone number, and fax

number on this request. Information is

also available on-line at

www.mep.nist.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Catalog of

Federal Domestic Assistance Name and

Number: The catalog number for the

award of Manufacturing Technology

Centers funds in the Catalog of Federal

Domestic Assistance is 11.611

Background

In accordance with the provisions of

Section 5121 of the Omnibus Trade and

Competitiveness Act of 1988 (Pub. L.

100–418), codified in 15 U.S.C. 278k,

and final rule 15 CFR 290 published

September 17, 1990 and amendment

published May 2, 1994, NIST will

provide assistance for the creation and

support of manufacturing extension

centers. The objective of these centers is

to enhance productivity, technological

performance, and strengthen the global

competitiveness of small- and mediumsized U.S.-based manufacturing firms.

These manufacturing extension

centers will become part of the MEP

national system of extension service

providers. Currently, the MEP national

system consists of over 400 centers and

field offices located throughout the

United States and Puerto Rico.

Information regarding MEP and these

centers is provided in the information

packet that can be obtained as explained

above or on-line at www.mep.nist.gov.

Funding Availability

It is anticipated that approximately

$1,500,000 will be available to support

manufacturing extension centers under

this program. The funding level for

individual awards is not prescribed. The

funding requested by the applicant

should be directly related to the level of

activity of the center, which is a

function of the number of manufacturers

in the designated service region, and to

the availability of applicant-provided

cash and in-kind contributions to be

used as cost share.

Invitation for Proposals

Proposals must be received at the

address listed above by September 5,

2000.

Award Period

The projects awarded under this

program will have a budget and

performance period of one year. These

projects may be renewable on an annual

basis subject to the review requirements

described in 15 CFR 290.8, but only if

additional funding is allocated to this

program by Congress beyond Federal

fiscal year 2000. Renewal of these

projects shall be at the sole discretion of

NIST and shall be based upon

satisfactory performance, priority of the

need for the service, existing legislative

authority, and availability of funds.

Although the MEP regulation (15 CFR

Part 290) indicates that Centers are not

eligible for MEP funding after six years,

this requirement is no longer in effect.

Public Law 105–239 amended the

MEP’s organic legislation to authorize

MEP to fund Centers for more that six

years under specified circumstances.

Cost Share Requirements

A cost sharing contribution from the

applicant is required. The applicant

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 130 / Thursday, July 6, 2000 / Notices 41635

must provide 50% or more of the total

capital, operating and maintenance

costs for the center for years 1 through

3. The applicant’s cost share

requirement increases to 60% or more

in year 4 and 662⁄3% or more in years

5 and beyond. The applicant’s share of

the center expenses may include cash

and in-kind contributions. However, at

least 50% of the applicant’s total cost

share (cash plus in-kind) must be in

cash. The source of the cost share, both

cash and in-kind, must be documented

in the budget submitted in the proposal.

In all cases, a contribution will only

be treated as cash cost share if the center

director has suitable authority and

discretion to control its expenditure.

Acceptable cash cost share, which must

come from non-federal sources,

includes’’:

—Dollar contributions from state,

county, city, industrial or other

sources

—Income from fees charged for services

performed

—Revenue from licensing, royalties,

dividends, and capital gains

—Contributions of full-time personnel

from other organizations

—Other contributions as approved by

NIST

To qualify as in-kind cost share, the

claimed items must be directly related

to the tasks to be accomplished and

must be utilized solely for the center

activities or the cost share must be

prorated based upon the percentage of

time they are used for these activities.

Acceptable in-kind cost share includes:

—Contributions of full-time personnel

for which the center director lacks

suitable authority and discretion to

qualify as cash cost share

—Contributions of part-time personnel

from other organizations

—Contributions of equipment, software,

rental value of office, laboratory or

other space

—Other contributions as approved by

NIST

In addition, recipients are required to

comply with the regulations found at 15

CFR 14.23.

Proposal Content

The proposal must, at a minimum,

include the following:

A. An executive summary of the

proposed project, consistent with the

Evaluation Criteria stated in this notice.

B. A description of the proposed

project, sufficient to permit evaluation

of the proposal, in accordance with the

proposal Evaluation Criteria stated in

this notice.

C. A detailed budget for the proposed

project which breaks out all expenses

for year 1 of operation and identifies all

sources of funds to pay these expenses.

D. A budget outline for annual costs

and sources of funds for potential years

2 through 5 and beyond. It is expected,

especially for newly created centers,

that year one costs are lower because of

a ramp-up of operations from start-up to

the point where the center is fully

operational and services are being

provided. If such a ramp-up of

operations is to occur, this should be

reflected in the budget outline for years

2 through 5 and beyond. A detailed

budget and budget narrative will be

required prior to each of years 2 through

5.

E. A description of the qualifications

of key personnel who will be assigned

to work on the proposed project.

F. A statement of work that discusses

the specific tasks to be carried out,

including a schedule of measurable

events and milestones.

G. A Standard Form 424, 424–A, and

424–B (Rev 7/97) prescribed by 15 CFR

14 (OMB Circular A–110), Form CD–

511, Certification Regarding Debarment,

Suspension and Other Responsibility

Matters; Drug-Free Workplace

Requirements and Lobbying, and Form

CD–346, Applicant For funding

Assistance/Name Check. The 424 and

CD series of forms will not be

considered part of the page count of the

proposal.

In addition, the proposal must contain

the requirements identified in 15 CFR

290.5(a)(3), which are:

A. A plan for the allocation of

intellectual property rights associated

with any invention or copyright which

may result from the involvement in the

Center’s technology transfer or research

activities consistent with the conditions

of 15 CFR 290.9.

B. A statement which provides

adequate assurances that the host

organization will contribute the

required cost share, 50 percent or more

of the proposed Center’s capital and

annual operating and maintenance costs

for the first three years and an

increasing share for each of the

following three additional years.

(Although the MEP regulation, 15 CFR

290.5(a)(3)(ii), states that applicants

should provide evidence that the

proposed Center will be self-supporting

after six years, this requirement is no

longer in effect, as indicated above.)

C. A statement describing linkages to

industry, government, and educational

organizations within its service region.

D. A statement defining the initial

service region including a statement of

the constituency to be served and the

level of service to be provided, as well

as outyear plans.

E. A statement agreeing to focus the

mission of the Center on technology

transfer activities and not to exclude

companies based on state boundaries.

F. A proposed plan for the annual

evaluation of the success of the Center

by the Program, including appropriate

criteria for consideration, and weighting

of those criteria.

G. A plan to focus the Center’s

technology emphasis on areas consistent

with NIST technology research

programs and organizational expertise.

H. A description of the planned

Center sufficient to permit NIST to

evaluate the proposal in accordance

with section 290.6 of the MEP

regulations.

Proposal Format

The proposal must not exceed 25

typewritten pages in length. The

proposal must contain both technical

and cost information. The proposal page

count shall include every page,

including pages that contain words,

table of contents, executive summary,

management information and

qualifications, resumes, figures, tables,

and pictures. All proposals shall be

printed such that pages are single-sided,

with no more than fifty-five (55) lines

per page. Use 21.6 x 27.9 cm (81⁄2′′ x 11′′)

paper or A4 metric paper. Use an easyto-read font of not more than about 5

characters per cm (fixed pitch font of 12

or fewer characters per inch or

proportional font of point size 10 or

larger). Smaller type may be used in

figures and tables, but must be clearly

legible. margins on all sides (top,

bottom, left and right) must be at least

2.5 cm. (1′′). The applicant may submit

a separately bound document of

appendices containing other supporting

information. The proposal should be

self-contained and not rely on the

appendices for meeting criteria. Excess

pages in the proposal will not be

considered in the evaluation.

Applicants must submit one signed

original plus three (3) copies of the

proposal.

Manufacturing Extension Centers

a. Project Objective

The objective of the projects funded

under this program is to provide

manufacturing extension services to

small- and medium-sized manufacturers

in the United States. These services are

provided through the coordinated

efforts of a regionally-based

manufacturing extension center and

local technology resources. The

management and operational structure

of the manufacturing extension center is

not prescribed, but should be based

41636 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 130 / Thursday, July 6, 2000 / Notices

upon the characteristics of the

manufacturers in the region and locally

available resources. The center should

include plans for integration into the

MEP national system and linkages to

appropriate national resources.

The focus of the center is to provide

those manufacturing extension services

required by the small- and mediumsized manufacturers in their service

region using the most cost effective

sources for those services. It is not the

intent of the is program that centers

perform research and development.

b. Evaluation Criteria

All qualified proposals will be

evaluated and rated on the basis of the

following criteria by an impartial review

panel. Each proposal should address all

four evaluation criteria, which are

assigned equal weighting.

(1) Identification of Target Firms in

Proposed Regions. Does the proposal

define an appropriate service region

with a large enough population of target

firms of small- and medium-sized

manufacturers that the applicant

understands and can serve, and which

is not presently served by an existing

center?

(i) Market Analysis. Demonstrated

understanding of the service region’s

manufacturing base, including business

size, industry types, product mix, and

technology requirements.

(ii) Geographical Location. Physical

size, concentration of industry, and

economic significance of the service

region’s manufacturing base.

Geographical diversity of the centers

will be a factor in evaluation of

proposals; a proposal for a center

located near an existing center may be

considered only if the proposal is

unusually strong and the population of

manufacturers and the technology to be

addressed justify it.

(2) Technology Resources. Does the

proposal assure strength in technical

personnel and programmatic resources,

full-time staff, facilities, equipment, and

linkages to external sources of

technology?

(3) Technology Delivery Mechanisms.

Does the proposal clearly and sharply

define an effective methodology for

delivering advanced manufacturing

technology to small- and medium-sized

manufacturers?

(i) Linkages. Development of effective

partnerships or linkages to third parties

such as industry, universities, nonprofit

economic organizations, and state

governments who will amplify the

center’s technology delivery to reach a

large number of clients in its service

region.

(ii) Program Leverage. Provision of an

effective strategy to amplify the center’s

technology delivery approaches to

achieve the proposed objectives as

described in 15 CFR 290.3(e).

(4) Management and Financial Plan.

Does the proposal define a management

structure and assure management

personnel to carry out development and

operation of an effective center?

(i) Organizational Structure.

Completeness and appropriateness of

the organizational structure, and its

focus on the mission of the center.

Assurance of full-time top management

of the center.

(ii) Program Management.

Effectiveness of the planned

methodology of program management.

(iii) Internal Evaluation. Effectiveness

of the planned continuous internal

evaluation of program activities.

(iv) Plans for Financial Matching.

Demonstrated stability and duration of

the applicants funding commitments as

well as the percentage of operating and

capital costs guaranteed by the

applicant. Identification of matching

fund sources and the general terms of

the funding commitments.

(v) Budget. Suitability and focus of

the applicant’s detailed one-year budget

and budget outline for years 2–5 and

beyond.

Eligibility Criteria

• Eligible applicants for these projects

must be affiliated with a non-profit

institution or organization and may be

consortia of non-profits institutions.

• The applicant must provide the

necessary cost share as specified above.

Proposal Selection Process

Proposal evaluation and selection will

consist of four principal phases:

proposal qualification, proposal review,

site visits and award determination.

a. Proposal Qualification

All proposals will be reviewed by

NIST to assure compliance with the

proposal content as described in 15 CFR

290.5 and other basic provisions of this

notice. Proposals that satisfy these

requirements will be designated as

qualified proposals. Non-qualified

proposals will not be evaluated and will

be returned to the applicant.

b. Proposal Review

NIST will appoint an evaluation

panel, consisting of one non-Federal

Government employee and at least two

Federal Government employees, to

conduct an independent and objective

review and evaluation of all qualified

proposals in accordance with the

evaluation criteria set forth in this

notice. Based upon this review, the

panel will deliberate, and each panelist

will rank the proposals based on the

scores in relation to the evaluation

criteria, as a basis for selecting a group

of finalists to be site visited.

c. Site Visits

Finalists will be notified and a day,

time, and location for a site visit will be

established. The panel will review

finalists again on site, based on the

evaluation criteria. Subsequently, the

panel will deliberate again, and each

panelist will rank the proposals again by

assigning numeric scores based on the

evaluation criteria, assessing equal

weight to each of the four criteria. Based

upon this rank scores, the panel will

submit recommendations to the Director

of NIST, or a designee, for final award

recommendation to the NIST Grants

Officer.

d. Award Determination

The Director of NIST, or a designee,

shall make final recommendation of

whether an award should be made to

the proposing organization based on a

review of the panel’s adherence to

program objectives and program

procedures. The final approval of the

selected applications and award of

cooperative agreements will be made by

the NIST Grants Officer based on

compliance with program requirements

and whether the recommended

applicants appear competently

managed, responsible, and committed to

achieving project objectives. The

decision of the Grants Officer is final.

Paperwork Reduction Act

The Standard Form 424 and other

Standard Forms in this application kit

are subject to the Paperwork Reduction

Act and have been approved by OMB

under Control Numbers 0348–0043,

0348–0044, 0038–0040, and 0348–0046.

Proposals are subject to the

requirements of the Paperwork

Reduction Act and have been approved

by OMB under Control Number 0693–

0032.

Notwithstanding any other provision

of law, no person is required to respond

to, nor shall any person be subject to a

penalty for failure to comply with a

collection, subject to the requirements

of the Paperwork Reduction Act, unless

that collection of information displays a

currently valid OMB Control Number.

Additional Requirements

(a) Federal Policies and Procedures.

Recipients and sub-recipients are

subject to all Federal laws and Federal

and NIST policies, regulations, and

procedures applicable to Federal

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 130 / Thursday, July 6, 2000 / Notices 41637

financial assistance awards, including

15 CFR Part 14, Uniform Administrative

Requirements for Grants and

Agreements with Institutions of Higher

Education, Hospitals, Other Non-Profit,

and commercial Organizations.

(b) Indirect Costs. Regardless of any

approved indirect cost rate applicable to

the award, the maximum amount of the

indirect costs for which DOC will

reimburse the recipient shall be the

lesser of:

(1) The Federal share of the total

allocable indirect costs of based on the

negotiated rate with the cognizant

Federal agency as established by audit

or negotiation; or

(2) The line item amount for the

Federal share of indirect costs dollar

contained in the approved budget of the

award.

(c) Pre-award Activities. Applicants

(or their institutions) who incur any

costs prior to an award being made do

so solely at their own risk of not being

reimbursed by the Government.

Notwithstanding any verbal assurance

that may have been received, there is no

obligation on the part of NIST to cover

pre-award costs.

(d) Delinquent Federal Debts. No

award of Federal funds shall be made to

an applicant who has an outstanding

delinquent Federal debt until either:

(1) The delinquent account is paid in

full;

(2) A negotiated repayment schedule

is established and at least one payment

is received; or

(3) Other arrangements satisfactory to

NIST are made.

(e) Past Performance. Unsatisfactory

performance under prior Federal awards

may result in an application not being

considered for funding.

(f) Name Check Review. All non-profit

applicants will be subject to a name

check review process. Name checks are

intended to reveal if any key individuals

associated with the applicant have been

convicted of or are presently facing

criminal charges such as fraud, theft,

perjury, or other matters which

significantly reflect on the applicant’s

management honesty or financial

integrity. Form CD–346 must be

completed for all personnel with key

programmatic or fiduciary

responsibilities.

(g) Primary Applicant Certification.

All primary applicants must submit a

completed Form CD–511,

‘‘Certifications Regarding Debarment,

Suspension and Other Responsibility

Matters; Drug-Free Workplace

Requirements and Lobbying,’’ and the

following explanations must be

provided.

(1) Non Procurement Debarment and

Suspension. Prospective participants (as

defined at 15 CFR Part 26, Section 105)

are subject to 15 CFR Part 26,

‘‘Nonprocurement Debarment and

Suspension’’ and the related section of

the certification form prescribed above

applies;

(2) Drug-free Workplace. Recipients

(as defined at 15 CFR Part 26, Section

605) are subject to 15 CFR Part 26,

Subpart F, ‘‘Government-wide

Requirements for Drug-Free Workplace

(Grants)’’ and the related section of the

certification form prescribed above

applies;

(3) Anti-lobbying. Persons (as defined

at 15 CFR Part 28, Section 105) are

subject to the lobbying provisions of 31

U.S.C. 1352, ‘‘Limitation on use of

appropriated funds to influence certain

Federal contracting and financial

transactions,’’ and the lobbying section

of the certification form prescribed

above applies to applications/bids for

grants, cooperative agreements, and

contracts for more than $100,000, and

loans and load guarantees for more than

$150,000, or the single family maximum

mortgage limit for affected programs,

whichever is greater; and

(4) Anti-lobbying Disclosures. Any

application that has paid or will pay for

lobbying using any funds must submit

as SF–LLL, ‘‘Disclosure of Lobbying

Activities,’’ as required under 15 CFR

Part 28, Appendix B.

(h) Lower Tier Certifications.

Recipients shall require applicants/

bidders for subgrants, contracts,

subcontracts, or other lower tier covered

transactions at any tier under the award

to submit if applicable, a completed

Form CD–512, ‘‘Certifications Regarding

Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility

and Voluntary Exclusion-Lower Tier

Covered Transactions and Lobbying’’

and disclosure form, SF–LLL,

‘‘Disclosure of Lobbying Activities.’’

Form CD–512 is intended for the use of

recipients and should not be transmitted

to NIST. SF–LLL submitted by any tier

recipient or sub-recipient should be

submitted to NIST in accordance with

the instructions contained in the award

document.

(i) False Statements. A false statement

on an application is grounds for denial

or termination of funds and grounds for

possible punishment by a fine or

imprisonment as provided in 18 U.S.C.

1001.

(j) Purchase of American-made

Equipment and Products. Applicants are

hereby notified that they are

encouraged, to the greatest extent

practicable, to purchase American-made

equipment and products with the

funding provided under this program.

(k) North American Free Trade

Agreement Patent Notification

Procedure. Pursuant to Executive Order

12889, the Department of Commerce

(DoC) is required to notify the owner

any valid patent covering technology

whenever the DoC or its financial

assistance recipient, without making a

patent search, knows (or has

demonstrable reasonable grounds to

know) that technology covered by a

valid United States patent has been or

will be used without a license from the

owner. Applicants selected for awards

under this program are required to

comply with this executive order.

(() intergovernmental Review.

Applicants under this program are not

subject to the requirements of Executive

Order 12372, ‘‘Intergovernmental

Review of Federal Programs’’.

(m) No Obligation for Future Funding.

If an application is accepted for funding,

DOC has no obligation to provide any

additional future funding in connection

with that award. Renewal of an award

to increase funding or extend the period

of performance is at the total discretion

on NIST.

Program Execution

(a) Type of Funding Instrument. The

formal agreement between NIST and the

applicant will be in the form of a

cooperative agreement. Under this

agreement, the NIST MEP will have

substantial interactions with the

applicant in planning and executing this

project. This will include the following:

—Assistant in developing required

plans

—Providing access to standard

manufacturing extension and related

tools

—Facilitating partnering with

appropriate organizations both within

and outside of the MEP national

system

—Defining measures for evaluation of

performance

—Direct involvement in helping to

understanding, define, and resolve

problems in the center’s operations

(b) Operating Plan. All recipients of

awards are required to submit an

Operating Plan within ninety (90) days

of the project start date. The Operating

Plan is a more detailed statement of

work based on project objectives and

activities the applicant will undertake to

achieve the objectives and incorporates

recommendations provided by the

evaluation panel and the NIST Program

Officer. The Operating Plan must be

reviewed and approved by NIST and

will be incorporated into the

cooperative agreement by amendment.

Operating Plan guideline will be

distributed to award recipients.

41638 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 130 / Thursday, July 6, 2000 / Notices

(c) Project Reporting. Quarterly

reports will be submitted to the NIST

Program Officer no later than thirty (30)

days after the end of each quarter of the

award year. The information provided is

used to characterize the projects,

develop detailed case studies, and

evaluate individual examples of

outcomes. Quarterly reporting

instructions will be distributed to award

recipients.

Executive Order Statement

This funding notice was determined

to be ‘‘not significant’’ for purposes of

Executive Order 12866.

Dated: June 29, 2000.

Raymond G. Kammer,

Director.

[FR Doc. 00–17085 Filed 7–5–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–13–M

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

[I.D. 052400C]

Endangered and Threatened Species;

Notice of Availability for the Draft

Recovery Plan for Johnson’s Seagrass

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of availability of a draft

recovery plan; request for comments;

correction.

SUMMARY: In the notice of availability of

the draft recovery plan for Johnson’s

seagrass, published on June 26, 2000,

the mailing address for comments was

inadvertently omitted. Also, the notice

did not include a web site address for

accessing the draft recovery plan. This

document corrects the notice of

availability.

DATES: Comments on the draft recovery

plan must be received no later than 5

p.m., Eastern standard time, on August

25, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on the

draft recovery plan should be addressed

to Mr. Charles Oravetz, Assistant

Regional Administrator, Protected

Resources Division, NMFS, Southeast

Regional Office, 9721 Executive Center

Drive North, St. Petersburg, Florida

33702–2432. In addition to being

available from Layne Bolen, Protected

Resources Division, NMFS, 9721

Executive Center Drive North, St.

Petersburg, FL 33702–2439; the draft

plan can also be downloaded from the

following site: http://www.nmfs.gov/

prot_res/other/jsrecover.pdf. Comments

may be sent via facsimile (fax) to 727–

570–5517, but they will not be accepted

if submitted via e-mail or Internet.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Layne Bolen at 850–234–6541 ext 237,

Dr. Judson Kenworthy at 252–728–8750,

or Marta Nammack at 301–713–1401 ext

116, or send a request via electronic

mail to jsg.info@noaa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Need for Correction

In the notice of availability of the

draft recovery plan for Johnson’s

seagrass, published on June 26, 2000 (65

FR 39369), the mailing address for

comments was inadvertently omitted.

Also, the notice did not include a web

site address for accessing the draft

recovery plan. This document provides

this information (see ADDRESSES).

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531–1543 et seq.

Dated: June 29, 2000.

Andrew A. Rosenberg,

Deputy Assistant Administrator for Fisheries,

National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 00–17113 Filed 7–5–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–F

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

[I.D. 062900C]

North Pacific Fishery Management

Council; Public Meeting

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of committee meeting.

SUMMARY: The North Pacific Fishery

Management Council’s (NPFMC)

Observer Committee will meet in

Seattle, WA.

DATES: The meeting will be held on July

24–25, 2000.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at

the Alaska Fisheries Science Center,

7600 Sand Point Way NE, Bldg. 4, Room

1055, Seattle, WA.

Council address: North Pacific

Fishery Management Council, 605 W.

4th Ave., Suite 306, Anchorage, AK

99501–2252.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Chris Oliver, NPFMC, 907–271–2809.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

meeting will begin at 9:00 a.m. on

Monday, July 24, and continue until

business for the day is completed. The

meeting will reconvene on Tuesday,

July 25, at 9:00 a.m. The committee’s agenda includes the

following issues:

1. Review and discuss information on:

A. General observer needs by week;

B. Foreign observer program model;

and

C. Updated estimates of observer

costs, exvessel value, and potential fee

percentage.

2. Review and discuss findings of an

independent review of the North Pacific

groundfish observer program prepared

by MRAG Americas.

3. Discuss baseline program goals and

objectives.

4. Discuss and identify major program

alternatives

5. Discuss and resolve appropriate

wording for Magnuson-Stevens Act

reauthorization.

6. Identify additional information

needs.

Although non-emergency issues not

contained in this agenda may come

before this committee for discussion,

those issues may not be the subject of

formal action during this meeting.

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 MagnusonStevens 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

These meetings are physically

accessible to people with disabilities.

Requests for sign language

interpretation or other auxiliary aids

should be directed to Helen Allen, 907–

271–2809, at least 5 working days prior

to the meeting date.

Dated: June 29, 2000.

Richard W. Surdi,

Acting Director, Office of Sustainable

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 00–17111 Filed 7–5–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–F

UNITED STATES PATENT AND

TRADEMARK OFFICE

Submission for OMB Review;

Comment Request

The United States Patent and

Trademark Office (USPTO) has

submitted 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: United States Patent and

Trademark Office (USPTO).