Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 159 / Monday, August 18, 1997 / Notices 43997

Federal share of the costs of the program

supported by the grant, the Corporation

may consider in-kind contributions

(including facilities, equipment, and

services) made to plan and carry out the

service opportunity. Grants under this

program constitute Federal assistance

and therefore may not be used primarily

to inhibit or advance religion in a

material way.

Eligible Applicants

By law, any entity otherwise eligible

for assistance under the national service

laws shall be eligible to receive a grant

under this announcement. The

applicable laws include the National

and Community Service Act of 1990, as

amended, and the Domestic Volunteer

Service Act of 1973, as amended.

Eligible applicants include, but are

not limited to: nonprofit organizations,

State Commissions, state and local

governments, institutions of higher

education, local education agencies,

educational institutions, private

organizations that intend to utilize

volunteers in carrying out the purposes

of this program, and foundations.

The Corporation especially invites

applications from organizations with the

experience and commitment to fostering

service on Martin Luther King, Jr. Day,

including applicable State Martin

Luther King, Jr. Commissions, local

education agencies, faith-based

partnerships, Volunteer Centers of the

Points of Light Foundation, and United

Ways and other community-based

agencies.

Grant recipients from the 1997 Martin

Luther King, Jr., Day of Service Initiative

will be eligible only if in compliance

with the terms of that grant award.

Pursuant to the Lobbying Disclosure

Act of 1995, an organization described

in section 501(c)(4) of the Internal

Revenue Code of 1986, 26 U.S.C.

501(c)(4), which engages in lobbying

activities, is not eligible.

Overview of Application Requirements

To be considered for funding

applicants should submit the following

in the required format:

1. An Application for Federal

Assistance, Standard Form 424.

2. A Project Narrative in the prescribed

format describing:

a. Clearly-defined service activities

being planned in observance of

Martin Luther King, Jr. Day, some of

which must take place on the legal

Federal holiday (January 19, 1998),

but which may extend for the

budget period (November 1, 1997

through June 30, 1998).

b. The partnerships in the local

community that are being engaged

in support of the day and/or a

description of sustained service

activities over a period of time.

c. The organization’s background and

capacity to carry out this program.

d. The proposed staffing of the

activity.

3. A Budget Form.

4. A Budget Narrative.

5. A signed Certification and Assurances

form relating to conditions

attendant to the receipt of federal

funding.

6. Three complete copies (one original

and two copies) of the application.

Narrative

The narrative portion of the

application may be no longer than 15

single-sided pages and must: (1) Be

typed double-spaced in font no smaller

than 12 point on 81⁄2 by 11 inch paper;

(2) have one inch margins at the top,

bottom, left, and right; and (3) have each

page of the narrative numbered. All

applications must be received by 5:00

p.m. Eastern Daylight Time, September

30, 1997 at the following address: MLK

Day of Service, Corporation for National

Service, 1201 New York Avenue, NW,

8th Floor, Washington, DC 20525

To ensure fairness to all applicants,

the Corporation reserves the right to

take remedial action, up to and

including disqualification, in the event

an application fails to comply with the

requirements relating to page limits, line

spacing, font size, and application

deadlines.

Budget

Budget information should show

projected costs starting no earlier than

November 1, 1997, and extending no

later than June 30, 1998. Proposed start

and end dates must be shown in section

13 of the Application for Federal

Assistance, Standard Form 424. See the

attached instructions for budget in the

Standard Form 424 for further guidance

in completing the Budget Form and

Budget Narrative.

Selection Process and Criteria

The applications will be reviewed

initially to confirm that the applicant is

an eligible recipient and to ensure that

the application contains the information

required. The Corporation will assess

applications based on their

responsiveness to the objectives

included in this announcement based

on the following criteria listed below (in

descending order of importance):

1. Quality. The proposal must

demonstrate the applicant’s ability to:

meet community needs through

meaningful service activities, establish

strong community partnerships, fulfill

the goals of Martin Luther King Jr.’s

teaching with preference given to

projects that also serve young people.

2. Organizational Capacity. The

application must demonstrate the

organization’s ability to carry out the

activities described in the proposal,

including the use of high quality staff.

3. Cost. The applicant must

demonstrate how this small grant will

be used, including the sources and uses

of matching support.

Awards

The Corporation anticipates making

awards under this announcement no

later than November 15, 1997.

Dated: August 12, 1997.

Stewart Davis,

Acting General Counsel, Corporation for

National and Community Service.

[FR Doc. 97–21734 Filed 8–15–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6050–28–P

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Finding of No Significant Impact for

the Defense Logistics Agency Late

Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC)

Actions

AGENCY: Defense Logistics Agency

(DLA), Department of Defense.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Defense Logistics Agency

(DLA) prepared a programmatic

environmental assessment pursuant to

the Council on Environmental Quality

Regulations (40 CFR Parts 1500–1508)

for implementing the procedural

provisions of the National

Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C.

4321 et seq.) which evaluated the

potential environmental and

socioeconomic effects associated with

realigning designated missions and

personnel to enduring DLA activities

pursuant to recommendations by the

BRAC Commission and related

discretionary action plans. The

environmental assessment resulted in a

finding of no significant environmental

or socioeconomic impact.

EFFECTIVE DATE: August 18, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Daniel W. McGinty, Staff Director,

Congressional and Public Affairs,

Defense Logistics Agency, 8725 John J.

Kingman Road, Suite 2533, ATTN:

CAAR, Fort Belvoir, VA 22060–6220,

(703) 767–6222.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In

summary, the DLA proposed action,

identified as the preferred alternative, is

to:

• Relocate the Defense Contract

Management District West to a
43998 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 159 / Monday, August 18, 1997 / Notices

purchased office building in the Los

Angeles/Long Beach area. Relocate the

Defense Contract Management Area

Office Detroit, Detroit Arsenal, MI, to

existing facilities on the realigned

Detroit Arsenal. Relocate the Defense

Contract Management Area Office

Dayton, Gentile, Air Force Station

(AFS), OH, to Wright Patterson Air

Force Base (AFB), Dayton, OH. Relocate

the Defense Contract Management Area

Office Stratford, Stratford Army Engine

Plant, CT, to GSA lease facilities in the

Stratford, CT, area.

• Relocate the Defense Distribution

Depot missions that remain after the

disestablishment of the Defense

Distribution Depot Letterkenny, PA

(DDLP) (with the exception of a DLA

satellite operation at Letterkenny Army

Depot to support the continuing missile

maintenance mission); the realignment

of Defense Distribution Depot

Columbus, OH (DDCO); and closure of

Defense Distribution Depot Memphis,

TN (DDMT), Defense Distribution Depot

Ogden, UT (DDOU) and Defense

Distribution Depot McClellan, CA

(DDMC), and the redistribution of the

remaining mission and materials to the

enduring Defense Distribution Depots.

Relocate the specified mission from

DDLP and discretionary mission from

Defense Distribution Depot Red River,

TX (DDRT) to the Defense Distribution

Depot Anniston, AL (DDAA). Privatize

and ultimately disestablish the Defense

Distribution Depot San Antonio, TX

(DDST). Relocate the Deployable

Medical Systems (DEPMEDS) from

DDOU to Hill AFB, Ogden, UT.

• Reorganize the Inventory Control

Points (ICPs) from five to three (except

for the Defense Fuel Supply Center) into

the Defense Supply Centers, Columbus,

OH (DSCC), Philadelphia, PA (DSCP),

and Richmond, VA (DSCR). Relocate the

mission of the Defense Electronics

Supply Center, Gentile AFS, Dayton,

OH, to the DSCC, disestablishing the

Defense Industrial Supply Center,

Philadelphia, (DISC) and redistribute

the residual mission among the

enduring Defense Supply Centers.

Relocate the Defense Personnel Support

Center (to become DSCP) to the Naval

Aviation Supply Office (Naval Inventory

Control Point, Philadelphia).

• Enclave Defense National Stockpile

(DNSC) material at Letterkenny Army

Depot, Chambersburg, PA, Seneca Army

Depot, Romulus, NY, and Sierra Army

Depot, Herlong, CA. Sell strategic

materials and ores and return the

following sites to the permitting military

service at Savanna Army Depot,

Savanna, IL, DDMT, and Naval Surface

Warfare Center, Louisville, KY. If, in the

future, it were determined that materials

must be relocated, then site-specific

NEPA analysis, if appropriate, would be

conducted.

• Relocate the Headquarters, Defense

Reutilization and Marketing Service

(DRMS) organizations located at closing

installations. Specifically, relocate the

Defense Reutilization and Marketing

Service-International Sales Office at

DDMT to the Headquarters, DRMS,

Battle Creek, MI, and the Defense

Reutilization and Marketing ServiceOperations West at DDOU to Hill AFB,

UT.

• Close 11 Defense Reutilization and

Marketing Offices (DRMOs) located at

closing and realigning military

installations and relocate any residual

mission to the enduring DRMOs.

Surplus and hazardous property would

be disposed by reutilization, transfer,

donation, sale, or ultimate disposal

(service contract) prior to the DRMO

relocation or disestablishment. Relocate

DRMO San Antonio, Kelly AFB, to new

facilities at Brooks AFB, TX, or lease

back current facilities from the Kelly

AFB Local Redevelopment Authority

(KLRA)—whichever is determined to be

the most operationally efficient and cost

effective. Site-specific NEPA analysis to

determine potential environmental and

socioeconomic effects would be

conducted, if appropriate, by the U.S.

Air Force.

• Relocate the operational sites of the

Defense Systems Design Center (DSDC)

located at closing installations.

Specifically, relocate DSDC–H from

DDOU to Hill AFB, DSDC–NJ, from

DDMT to the Federal Center Building,

Battle Creek, MI, and DSDC–SMA from

DDLP, Chambersburg, PA, to the

Defense Distribution Depot,

Susquehanna, PA.

Alternatives considered included the

proposed action, which was the

preferred alternative, and the no action

alternative. No other alternative was

considered feasible because it would

entail modernization or renovation of

existing facilities, leasing of off-base

facilities, and construction of new

facilities beyond that determined

essential to meet minimum

requirements to accommodate relocating

activities. Criteria used in the

decisionmaking process included

adhering to the approved BRAC

Commission recommendations,

maintaining effective and efficient

customer support by locating support as

close as possible to customers, and

maximizing use of existing facilities.

Any other alternative would require

excessive facility construction and/or

modifications, diminish customer

support, and increase costs to conduct

business.

Based upon the EIFS model output,

the 1,620 personnel relocating to the

Defense Construction Supply Center,

Columbus, OH, from Gentile AFS,

would not create a significant

socioeconomic effect in the region of

influence. The population increase in

Columbus, OH, would be less than 0.12

percent for that region of influence.

Additionally, employment would be

created in the region of influence and a

slight increase in the support

infrastructure within the region would

occur (e.g., increases in traffic and

school populations).

Site-specific NEPA analysis to

determine the potential environmental

and socioeconomic effects beyond the

programmatic level will be conducted, if

appropriate, for the following actions:

Privatizing the Defense Distribution

Depot McClellan, CA (DDMC) and

Defense Distribution Depot San

Antonio, TX (DDST); relocating the

Deployable Medical Systems

(DEPMEDS) from DDOU to Hill AFB,

Ogden, UT; temporary and permanent

construction of a hazardous materials

storage warehouse at the Defense

Distribution Depot San Joaquin, CA

(Tracy site); and the construction of a

new facility at Brooks AFB or lease back

of the current facilities from the KLRA

for the DRMO located at Kelly AFB, TX.

If, in the future, it were determined that

DNSC materials must be relocated, then

site-specific NEPA analysis, if

appropriate, would be conducted.

Separate site-specific NEPA analyses

to determine the potential

environmental and socioeconomic

effects beyond the programmatic level

have been conducted for the following

actions: relocation of the Defense

Electronics Supply Center mission to

the Defense Supply Center, Columbus,

OH (DSCC), for which an environmental

assessment (EA) for the construction of

the operational facility was conducted

and a Finding of No Significant Impact

(FONSI) signed on June 27, 1991;

conversion of the Defense Distribution

Depot Columbus, OH (DDCO) to a

storage site for slow moving/war reserve

materiel, a project that would be

categorically excluded from analysis in

accordance with DLAR 1000.22;

completion of an AF Form 813 by the

Air Force on July 27, 1994, which

documented that the Air Force

approved a categorical exclusion from a

full EA for activities relocating from

Gentile AFS to Wright Patterson AFB;

and completion of an EA and FONSI by

the Navy on November 22, 1996,

associated with the relocation of the

Defense Personnel Support Center

(DPSC) to the Naval Aviation Supply

Office (Naval Inventory Control Point,
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 159 / Monday, August 18, 1997 / Notices 43999

Philadelphia, PA) and the consolidation

of the Defense Industrial Supply Center

with DPSC.

The military services exercising their

land-owning responsibilities will

conduct the NEPA analysis for the

disposal and reuse of DLA sites.

For the other actions, the

environmental assessment showed that

implementing the proposed action

would cause minimal or no adverse

environmental and socioeconomic

effects. A positive effect would be

realized through a reduction in DLA’s

consumption of resources and thereby

lessen negative environmental effects

associated with routine support of

Armed Forces activities. Analysis of the

consequences of the proposed action

does not indicate any environmental

impact mitigation measures required or

optional at the program level.

Accordingly, an environmental impact

statement will not be prepared.

A public comment period regarding

the environmental assessment will

begin at the time of publication of this

notice and will conclude 30 days

following. Copies of the environmental

assessment are available for inspection

at the address listed above. Interested

parties may contact the DLA Public

Affairs Office at (703) 767–6200.

Dated: August 12, 1997.

Jan B. Reitman,

Staff Director (Environmental and Safety

Policy).

[FR Doc. 97–21799 Filed 8–15–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3620–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

National Assessment Governing

Board; Meeting

AGENCY: National Assessment

Governing Board, Education.

ACTION: Notice of teleconference

meeting.

SUMMARY: This notice sets forth the

schedule and proposed agenda of a

forthcoming teleconference meeting of

the Reporting and Dissemination

Committee of the National Assessment

Governing Board. This notice also

describes the functions of the Board.

Notice of this meeting is required under

Section 10 (a) (2) of the Federal

Advisory Committee Act.

DATES: August 27, 1997.

TIME: 3:00 p.m. (et).

LOCATION: National Assessment

Governing Board, Suite 825, 800 North

Capitol Street, NW, Washington, D.C.,

20002–4233, Telephone: (202) 357–

6938.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mary Ann Wilmer, Operations Officer,

National Assessment Governing Board,

Suite 825, 800 North Capitol Street,

N.W., Washington, D.C., 20002–4233,

Telephone: (202) 357–6938.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

National Assessment Governing Board

is established under section 412 of the

National Education Statistics Act of

1994 (Title IV of the Improving

America’s Schools Act of 1994), (Pub. L.

103–382):

The Board is established to formulate

policy guidelines for the National

Assessment of Educational Progress.

The Board is responsible for selecting

subject areas to be assessed, developing

assessment objectives, identifying

appropriate achievement goals for each

grade and subject tested, and

establishing standards and procedures

for interstate and national comparisons.

On August 27, 1997 between the

hours of 3:00–4:30 P.M. the Reporting

and Dissemination Committee of the

National Assessment Governing Board

will hold a teleconference meeting. The

purpose of this meeting is to consider

plans for release of the Board’s report on

the 1996 NAEP Science Achievement

Board. There will be a brief presentation

on the contents and format of the report,

followed by determination of a release

date, release plan, and dissemination

activities. Because this is a

teleconference meeting, facilities will be

provided so the public will have access

to the Committee’s deliberations.

Records are kept of all Board

proceedings and are available for public

inspection at the U.S. Department of

Education, National Assessment

Governing Board, Suite 825, 800 North

Capitol Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.,

from 8:30 A.M. to 5:00 P.M.

Roy Truby,

Executive Director, National Assessment

Governing Board.

[FR Doc. 97–21781 Filed 8–15–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4000–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

National Educational Research Policy

and Priorities Board; Meeting

AGENCY: National Educational Research

Policy and Priorities Board; Education.

ACTION: Notice of workshop and

meeting.

SUMMARY: This notice sets forth the

schedule and proposed agenda of a

forthcoming workshop and meeting of

the National Educational Research

Policy and Priorities Board. This notice

also describes the functions of the

Board. Notice of this meeting is required

under section 10(a)(2) of the Federal

Advisory Committee Act. This

document is intended to notify the

public of their opportunity to attend

both of these events.

DATES: Workshop, September 25, 1997;

meeting, September 26, 1997.

TIME: Workshop, 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.;

meeting, 8:30 a.m. to 3 p.m.

LOCATION: Room 100, 80 F St., N.W.,

Washington, DC 20208–7564.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Thelma Leenhouts, Designated Federal

Official, National Educational Research

Policy and Priorities Board, 80 F St.,

N.W., Washington, DC 20208–7564.

Telephone: (202) 219–2065; fax: (202)

219–1528; e-mail; Thelma l

Leenhouts@ed.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

National Educational Research Policy

and Priorities Board is authorized by

section 921 of the Educational Research,

Development, Dissemination, and

Improvement Act of 1994. The Board

works collaboratively with the Assistant

Secretary for the Office of Educational

Research and Improvement to forge a

national consensus with respect to a

long-term agenda for educational

research, development, and

dissemination, and to provide advice

and assistance to the Assistant Secretary

in administering the duties of the Office.

The Board will conduct a workshop

on September 25 consisting of panels

and group discussions of a redesign of

the educational research, development

and dissemination system. On

September 26, the Board will hold its

quarterly meeting. The agenda will

include a discussion of the 1999

Research Priorities Plan, a presentation

on the findings of the Third

International Mathematics and Science

Study, and final review prior to

publication for public comment of the

proposed standards for the evaluation of

performance of recipients of grants,

contracts and cooperative agreements. A

final agenda will be available from the

Board’s office on September 18.

Records are kept of all Board

proceedings and are available for public

inspection at the office of the National

Educational Research Policy and

Priorities Board, 80 F Street, N.W.,

Washington, DC 20208–7564.

Dated: August 13, 1997.

Eve M. Bither,

Executive Director.

[FR Doc. 97–21802 Filed 8–15–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4000–01–M