Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 62 / Friday, March 30, 2012 / Notices 19357 

to shares of Common Stock should be 

passed through to the accounts of 

Participants. 

29. The Applicant states that the 

requested exemption is protective of the 

rights of Participants and beneficiaries 

because they had the opportunity, at 

their own discretion, to participate in 

the Offering on the same terms as every 

other Shareholder. The Applicant 

stresses that Participants and their 

beneficiaries had no obligation to 

exercise their Rights, and in fact could 

not exercise their Rights if the 

Subscription Price was below the 

Closing Price on January 14, 2011 (any 

Rights not exercised by the Participants 

simply expired). The Applicant states 

that the terms of the Offering were 

described to the Participants in clearly 

written communications, namely the 

401(k) Participant Instructions and the 

401(k) Participant Election Form, and 

that the decision by Participants to 

exercise Rights held in their Plan 

Accounts of the Participants in the 

Offering was strictly voluntary. Finally, 

the Applicant notes that neither TIB nor 

any of the Plan fiduciaries placed any 

pressure on Participants to exercise 

their Rights in the Offering or otherwise 

attempted to influence their decision, 

and the Offering was conducted in a 

manner which did not prejudice the 

Participants. 

Summary 

30. In summary, the Applicant 

represents that the covered transactions 

satisfied the statutory requirements for 

an exemption under section 408(a) of 

the Act because: 

(a) The receipt of the Rights by the 

Plan occurred pursuant to Plan 

provisions for individually directed 

investments of such accounts, in 

connection with the Offering, and was 

made available by TIB on the same 

terms to all Shareholders of Common 

Stock as of the Record Date; 

(b) The acquisition of the Rights by 

the Plan resulted from an independent 

act of TIB as a corporate entity, and all 

holders of the Rights, including the 

Plan, were treated in the same manner 

with respect to such acquisition; 

(c) All Shareholders of Common 

Stock, including the Plan, received the 

same proportionate number of Rights 

based on the number of shares of 

Common Stock held by such 

Shareholders; 

(d) All decisions regarding the Rights 

held by the Plan were made by the 

Participants whose accounts in the Plan 

received the Rights pursuant to the 

Offering, in accordance with the 

provisions under the Plan for 

individually-directed investment of 

such account; and 

(e) The Plan did not pay any fees or 

commissions in connection with the 

acquisition and or holding of the Rights. 

Notice to Interested Persons 

Notice of the proposed exemption 

will be given to all Participants who 

received Rights within 20 days of the 

publication of the notice of proposed 

exemption in the Federal Register, by 

first class U.S. mail to the last known 

address of all such Participants. Such 

notice will contain a copy of the notice 

of proposed exemption, as published in 

the Federal Register, and a 

supplemental statement, as required 

pursuant to 29 CFR 2570.43(b)(2). The 

supplemental statement will inform 

interested persons of their right to 

comment on and to request a hearing 

with respect to the pending exemption. 

Written comments and hearing requests 

are due within 50 days of the 

publication of the notice of proposed 

exemption in the Federal Register. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Warren Blinder of the Department, 

telephone (202) 693–8553. (This is not 

a toll-free number.) 

General Information 

The attention of interested persons is 

directed to the following: 

(1) The fact that a transaction is the 

subject of an exemption under section 

408(a) of the Act and/or section 

4975(c)(2) of the Code does not relieve 

a fiduciary or other party in interest or 

disqualified person from certain other 

provisions of the Act and/or the Code, 

including any prohibited transaction 

provisions to which the exemption does 

not apply and the general fiduciary 

responsibility provisions of section 404 

of the Act, which, among other things, 

require a fiduciary to discharge his 

duties respecting the plan solely in the 

interest of the participants and 

beneficiaries of the plan and in a 

prudent fashion in accordance with 

section 404(a)(1)(b) of the Act; nor does 

it affect the requirement of section 

401(a) of the Code that the plan must 

operate for the exclusive benefit of the 

employees of the employer maintaining 

the plan and their beneficiaries; 

(2) Before an exemption may be 

granted under section 408(a) of the Act 

and/or section 4975(c)(2) of the Code, 

the Department must find that the 

exemption is administratively feasible, 

in the interests of the plan and of its 

participants and beneficiaries, and 

protective of the rights of participants 

and beneficiaries of the plan; 

(3) The proposed exemptions, if 

granted, will be supplemental to, and 

not in derogation of, any other 

provisions of the Act and/or the Code, 

including statutory or administrative 

exemptions and transitional rules. 

Furthermore, the fact that a transaction 

is subject to an administrative or 

statutory exemption is not dispositive of 

whether the transaction is in fact a 

prohibited transaction; and 

(4) The proposed exemptions, if 

granted, will be subject to the express 

condition that the material facts and 

representations contained in each 

application are true and complete, and 

that each application accurately 

describes all material terms of the 

transaction which is the subject of the 

exemption. 

Signed at Washington, DC, this 27th day of 

March 2012. 

Lyssa E. Hall, 

Acting Director of Exemption Determinations, 

Employee Benefits Security Administration, 

U.S. Department of Labor. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7706 Filed 3–29–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–29–P 

OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND 

BUDGET 

Federal Participation in the 

Development and Use of Voluntary 

Consensus Standards and in 

Conformity Assessment Activities 

ACTION: Request for Information and 

Notice of public workshop. 

SUMMARY: The Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) invites interested 

parties to provide input on current 

issues regarding Federal agencies’ 

standards and conformity assessment 

related activities. Input is being sought 

to inform OMB’s consideration of 

whether and how to supplement 

Circular A–119 (Federal Participation in 

the Development and Use of Voluntary 

Consensus Standards and in Conformity 

Assessment Activities). In addition, 

OMB is announcing a public workshop 

at the Department of Commerce’s 

National Institute of Standards and 

Technology (NIST) on May 15, 2012. A 

complementary NIST workshop, 

‘‘Conformity Assessment: Approaches 

and Best Practices,’’ will take place on 

April 11, 2012 to seek input from 

individuals on the planned update of 

Guidance on Federal Conformity 

Assessment Activities, issued by NIST 

in 2000. The NIST workshop was 

announced separately by NIST at 

http://www.nist.gov/director/sco/caworkshop-2012.cfm (see also 77 FR 

15719; March 16, 2012). 

DATES: Comments: Comments are due 

on or before April 30, 2012. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

19358 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 62 / Friday, March 30, 2012 / Notices 

1See http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/ 

files/omb/memoranda/2012/m-12-08_1.pdf. 

Public workshop: In addition to 

providing written comments, interested 

parties are invited to attend the public 

workshop on May 15th. The workshop 

will include presentations from key 

government officials, industry, and 

experts on standards and conformity 

assessment issues, and time will be 

allotted for participant input and 

discussions. There is no registration fee 

for the workshop. 

Registration: To gain access to the 

NIST campus, located at 100 Bureau 

Drive in Gaithersburg, MD 20899, all 

participants must register in advance no 

later than 5 p.m. EST on May 8, 2012. 

Non-U.S. citizens must register no later 

than May 1, 2012. There will be no 

onsite registration. To register online, 

visit the ‘‘Register Now’’ link on the 

conference web site at https://wwws.nist.gov/CRS/ 

conf_disclosure.cfm?conf_id=5262. 

ADDRESSES: All comments should be 

submitted via http:// 

www.regulations.gov or faxed at 

202–395–5167. Please submit comments 

only and include your name, company 

name (if any), and cite ‘‘Federal 

Participation in the Development and 

Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards 

and in Conformity Assessment 

Activities’’ in all correspondence. All 

comments received will be posted, 

without change or redaction, to 

www.regulations.gov, so commenters 

should not include information they do 

not wish to be posted (e.g., personal or 

confidential business information). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jasmeet Seehra, Office of Information 

and Regulatory Affairs, at 

jseehra@omb.eop.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

‘‘National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995’’ (Pub L. 104– 

113; hereinafter ‘‘the NTTAA’’), 

Congress stated that Federal agencies 

‘‘shall use technical standards that are 

developed or adopted by voluntary 

consensus standards bodies, using such 

technical standards as a means to carry 

out policy objectives or activities,’’ 

except when an agency determines that 

such use ‘‘is inconsistent with 

applicable law or otherwise 

impractical.’’ As amended by Section 

1115 of Public Law 107–107, Section 

12(d) provides that: 

(d) UTILIZATION OF CONSENSUS 

TECHNICAL STANDARDS BY FEDERAL 

AGENCIES; REPORTS.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in 

paragraph (3) of this subsection, all Federal 

agencies and departments shall use technical 

standards that are developed or adopted by 

voluntary consensus standards bodies, using 

such technical standards as a means to carry 

out policy objectives or activities determined 

by the agencies and departments. 

(2) CONSULTATION; PARTICIPATION.— 

In carrying out paragraph (1) of this 

subsection, Federal agencies and 

departments shall consult with voluntary, 

private sector, consensus standards bodies 

and shall, when such participation is in the 

public interest and is compatible with agency 

and departmental missions, authorities, 

priorities, and budget resources, participate 

with such bodies in the development of 

technical standards. 

(3) EXCEPTION.—If compliance with 

paragraph (1) of this subsection is 

inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise 

impractical, a Federal agency or department 

may elect to use technical standards that are 

not developed or adopted by voluntary 

consensus standards bodies if the head of 

each such agency or department transmits to 

the Office of Management and Budget an 

explanation of the reasons for using such 

standards. Each year, beginning with fiscal 

year 1997, the Office of Management and 

Budget shall transmit to Congress and its 

committees a report summarizing all 

explanations received in the preceding year 

under this paragraph. 

(4) EXPENSES OF GOVERNMENT 

PERSONNEL.—Section 5946 of title 5, 

United States Code, shall not apply with 

respect to any activity of an employee of a 

Federal agency or department that is 

determined by the head of that agency or 

department as being an activity undertaken 

in carrying out this subsection. 

(5) DEFINITION OF TECHNICAL 

STANDARDS.—As used in this subsection, 

the term ‘‘technical standards’’ means 

performance based or design-specific 

technical specifications and related 

management systems practices. 

Section 12(d) is found as a ‘‘note’’ to 15 

U.S.C. 272. 

In response to the enactment of the 

NTTAA, OMB prepared a proposed set 

of revisions to Circular A–119 (entitled 

‘‘Federal Participation in the 

Development and Use of Voluntary 

Consensus Standards and in Conformity 

Assessment Activities’’) and issued a 

Federal Register notice seeking public 

comment on the proposed revisions. 61 

FR 68312 (December 27, 1996). After 

consideration of the comments, OMB 

issued the final revision of the Circular. 

63 FR 8546 (February 19, 1998). In the 

preamble to the final notice, OMB 

responded to the public comments and 

provided explanatory background 

regarding the revised Circular. A copy of 

the Circular is on OMB’s Web site at 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/ 

circulars_a119/. 

The policies in the Circular are 

intended to reduce to a minimum the 

reliance by agencies on governmentunique standards. In accordance with 

Section 12(d) of the NTTAA, Circular 

A–119 directs Federal agencies to use 

voluntary consensus standards in lieu of 

government-unique standards except 

where inconsistent with law or 

otherwise impractical. The Circular also 

provides guidance for agencies 

participating in the work of bodies that 

develop voluntary consensus standards 

and describes procedures for satisfying 

the NTTAA’s agency-reporting 

requirements. In addition, consistent 

with Section 12(b) of the NTTAA, the 

Circular directs the Secretary of 

Commerce to issue guidance to agencies 

in order to coordinate conformity 

assessment activities. 

On January 17, 2012, the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, the 

Office of Science and Technology 

Policy, and the United States Trade 

Representative built on the Circular and 

issued guidance on Federal engagement 

in standards activities to address 

national priorities.1 We note more 

generally the requirements of Executive 

Order 13563, which emphasizes that our 

regulatory system ‘‘must protect public 

health, welfare, safety, and our 

environment while promoting economic 

growth, innovation, competitiveness, 

and job creation’’ (emphasis added), 

and which stresses the importance of 

public participation and of careful 

consideration of both benefits and costs. 

Purpose: The purpose of this Request 

for Information (RFI) and related public 

workshop on May 15, 2012, is to allow 

interested stakeholders to provide input 

to OMB, NIST, Federal regulators and 

other relevant agencies on how the 

Federal government should address 

issues in standards and conformity 

assessment that have emerged or moved 

to the forefront since the Circular was 

promulgated in 1998. Such input could 

help improve U.S. agencies’ 

implementation of the NTTAA and the 

Circular. 

In addition, input received through 

the RFI and during the workshop could 

be used to inform OMB’s consideration 

of whether and how to supplement 

Circular A–119 to provide additional or 

more specific guidance on standards 

and conformity assessment to agencies 

engaged in rulemaking, procurement, 

and other activities. Any such 

supplemental guidance would be 

developed in conjunction with NIST’s 

effort to update its conformity 

assessment guidelines, in order to 

ensure consistency between the two 

documents. The NIST conformity 

assessment guidelines are available at 

http://gsi.nist.gov/global/docs/ 

FR_FedGuidanceCA.pdf. Additional 

information on the conformity 

assessment workshop objectives was 

provided by NIST in a separate Federal 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 62 / Friday, March 30, 2012 / Notices 19359 

Register notice published on March 16, 

2012 (77 FR 15719). 

If OMB determines, based on the 

responses to the RFI, discussions at the 

workshops, and further consideration of 

the issues, that it would be useful to 

develop supplemental guidance for the 

Circular to address some or all of the 

issues raised, then OMB will publish a 

draft notice in the Federal Register at a 

subsequent date and request public 

comment. 

In response to this RFI and at the 

workshop, OMB is interested in 

receiving input from interested 

stakeholders pertaining to one or more 

of the following issues relating to 

standards and conformity assessment, 

specifically with respect to how these 

issues may affect agencies engaged in 

rulemaking, procurement, and other 

activities. 

Agency Implementation of Circular 

A–119 in Rulemakings. Are Federal 

agencies generally following the 

guidance set out in the Circular and 

providing an adequate explanation of 

how they considered standards and 

conformity assessment-related issues in 

the preambles to rulemakings? 

Standardization Activities. OMB 

A–119 does not establish a preference 

between consensus and non-consensus 

standards developed in the private 

sector. A limited set of foundational 

attributes of standardization activities 

are identified in the Circular, focusing 

on voluntary consensus standard 

activities. It may also be important to 

recognize the contributions of 

standardization activities that take place 

outside of the voluntary consensus 

process, in particular certain activities 

in emerging technology areas. 

• What factors should agencies use in 

evaluating whether to use voluntary 

non-consensus standards in regulation, 

procurement solicitations, or other nonregulatory uses? OMB also invites 

comments on the respective roles of 

voluntary consensus standards vs. 

voluntary non-consensus standards for 

agency responsibilities in rulemaking, 

procurement, and other activities. 

Conformity Assessment. Circular 

A–119 directs the Secretary of 

Commerce to issue guidance to Federal 

agencies on conformity assessment. 

NIST issued such guidance in 2000 and 

plans to update the guidance. 

In conjunction with NIST’s efforts to 

update its conformity assessment 

guidance, should a supplement to 

Circular A–119 be issued to set out 

relevant principles on conformity 

assessment? If so, what issues should be 

addressed in such a supplement? The 

following are among the topics that 

could be considered: 

• Factors agencies should use in 

selecting the appropriate conformity 

assessment procedure, including 

product/sector specific issues and the 

level of risk of non-fulfillment of 

legitimate regulatory, procurement, or 

other mission-related objectives; 

• Guidance for regulatory agencies on 

compliance with relevant international 

obligations pertaining to conformity 

assessment and accreditation activities; 

• Factors agencies should consider in 

determining whether to recognize the 

results of conformity assessment and 

accreditation activities conducted by 

private sector bodies in support of 

regulation; 

• Non-regulatory uses of standards 

(including vendor conformity for 

purposes of response to procurement 

solicitations); and 

• Ensuring that agencies consider 

how to minimize conformity assessment 

costs and delays for businesses, 

especially small and medium sized 

enterprises, subject to statutory and 

budgetary constraints and the ability of 

agencies to fulfill their legitimate 

regulatory, procurement, or other 

mission-related objectives. 

Protection of Copyright Associated 

With Standards. Standards themselves 

are considered to be intellectual 

property and are typically copyrighted 

by the standards developing bodies that 

administer the process by which 

specific standards are developed and 

maintained. The rights of copyright 

holders are protected under U.S. law, 

and standards developers typically 

charge fees to access their copyrighted 

materials. Some parties have raised 

transparency concerns with respect to 

the availability of copyrighted materials 

in instances where standards are 

referenced or incorporated in regulation 

and compliance with such standards is 

mandatory. 

In this respect, we take note of three 

recent developments relevant to this 

issue: 

At its Plenary Session on December 8, 

2011, the Administrative Conference of 

the United States (ACUS) considered 

and adopted a Recommendation on 

Incorporation by Reference, specifically 

addressing the place of voluntary 

consensus standards in that process and 

how to determine ‘‘reasonable 

availability.’’ http://www.acus.gov/wpcontent/uploads/downloads/2011/12/

Recommendation-2011-5-Incorporationby-Reference.pdf. 

Second, the Pipeline Safety, 

Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation 

Act of 2011 (the Act) was signed into 

law on January 3, 2012 (Pub. L. 112–90). 

Section 24 of the Act created a new 

subsection (p) of Section 60102 of Title 

49 of the U.S. Code. Section 60102(p) 

prohibits the Secretary of 

Transportation from issuing ‘‘guidance 

or a regulation’’ pursuant to Title 49 of 

the U.S. Code, Chapter 601 (pipeline 

safety) ‘‘that incorporates by reference 

any documents or portions thereof 

unless those documents or portions 

thereof are made available to the public, 

free of charge, on an Internet Web site.’’ 

Section 60102(p) takes effect one year 

from the date of its enactment, i.e., 

January 3, 2013. 

Third, the National Archives and 

Records Administration, Office of the 

Federal Register, recently published a 

petition for rulemaking received on 

February 13, 2012, to amend its 

regulations governing the approval of 

agency requests to incorporate material 

by reference into the Code of Federal 

Regulations, and requested public 

comment. 77 FR 11414 (February 27, 

2012). OMB notes that the petition 

raises issues that are closely related to 

some of the issues discussed in this RFI 

and encourages interested stakeholders 

to provide comments in response to the 

petition. 

Circular A–119 specifically 

contemplates incorporation by reference 

of voluntary consensus standards by 

Federal agencies, defining agency ‘‘use’’ 

of a voluntary consensus standard as 

‘‘incorporation of a standard in whole, 

in part, or by reference for procurement 

purposes, and the inclusion of a 

standard in whole, in part, or by 

reference in regulation(s).’’ Circular 

A–119 also directs agencies to respect 

intellectual property rights that may 

exist in voluntary consensus standards 

that are incorporated into regulation by 

reference: ‘‘If a voluntary standard is 

used and published in an agency 

document, your agency must observe 

and protect the rights of the copyright 

holder and any other similar 

obligations.’’ 

Since passage of the NTTAA, major 

strides have been made by Federal 

agencies in their use of voluntary 

consensus standards. The NIST 

‘‘Standards Incorporated by Reference 

Database’’ includes thousands of such 

standards incorporated by reference in 

the CFR—http://standards.gov/sibr/ 

query/index.cfm?fuseaction=rsibr.total

_regulatory_sibr. 

• Is lack of access to standards 

incorporated by reference in regulation 

an issue for commenters responding to 

a request for public comment in 

rulemaking or for stakeholders that 

require access to such standards? Please 

provide specific examples. 

• What are the best practices for 

providing access to standards 

incorporated by reference in regulation 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

19360 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 62 / Friday, March 30, 2012 / Notices 

1The changes to the Act enacted in the 

Appropriations Act only apply to the FY 2012 

selection process. The relevant language would 

need to be included in next year’s appropriations 

during rulemaking and during the 

effective period of the regulation while 

respecting the copyright associated with 

the standard? 

• What are the best practices for 

incorporating standards by reference in 

regulation while respecting the 

copyright associated with the standard? 

Voluntary Consensus Standards and 

Cost-Benefit Analysis. Standards 

developing bodies, including not-forprofit organizations, use a variety of 

cost-recovery models as part of their 

overall way of doing business. OMB 

believes that it may be helpful for the 

purposes of the Circular and for the 

evaluation of costs and benefits of 

significant regulatory actions pursuant 

to Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

for Federal agencies to have a basic 

understanding of the costs associated 

with the development of private sector 

standards, in addition to the purchase 

costs of standards. Similarly, agencies 

and the public should have an 

understanding of the overall resources 

and costs that would be involved if 

Federal agencies were to develop 

government-unique standards. Both of 

these can be elements in determining 

when it is practical or impractical to 

incorporate a voluntary standard into 

regulation or otherwise adopt a standard 

in the course of carrying out an agency’s 

mission, as compared to developing a 

government-unique standard. 

• What resource and other costs are 

involved in the development and 

revision of voluntary standards? 

• What economic and other factors 

should agencies take into consideration 

when determining that the use of a 

voluntary standard is practical for 

regulatory or other mission purposes? 

• How often do standards-developing 

bodies review and subsequently update 

standards? If standards are already 

incorporated by reference in regulations, 

do such bodies have mechanisms in 

place for alerting the relevant agencies 

and the public, especially in regard to 

the significance of the changes in the 

standards? 

Using and Updating Standards in 

Regulation. Federal agencies have 

adopted various methods of using 

standards as a basis for regulation. They 

have also developed different 

approaches to updating standards that 

have been referenced or incorporated in 

regulations. 

• Should OMB set out best practices 

on how to reference/incorporate 

standards (or the relevant parts) in 

regulation? If so, what are the best 

means for doing so? Are the best means 

of reference/incorporation contextspecific? Are there instances where 

incorporating a standard or part thereof 

into a regulation is preferable to 

referencing a standard in regulation (or 

vice versa)? 

• Should an OMB supplement to the 

Circular set out best practices for 

updating standards referenced in 

regulation as standards are revised? If 

so, what updating practices have 

worked well and which ones have not? 

OMB recognizes that changes in 

technology and the need for innovation 

can result in the updating of private 

sector standards in a turn-around time 

of two years or even less. Where such 

standards are already incorporated into 

regulations, these changes can suggest a 

need to update the relevant regulations 

as well and, in some cases, can result in 

a need for regulated entities to purchase 

the newly updated standards on a fairly 

routine basis. In addition to the costs 

associated with the continuing purchase 

of such standards, rapid update cycles 

may make it difficult for the regulated 

public to understand the nature and 

significance of the changing regulations. 

• Is there a role for OMB in providing 

guidance on how Federal agencies can 

best manage the need for relevant 

regulations in the face of changing 

standards? 

• How should agencies determine the 

cost-effectiveness of issuing updated 

regulations in response to updated 

standards? 

• Do agencies consult sufficiently 

with private sector standards bodies 

when considering the update of 

regulations that incorporate voluntary 

standards, especially when such 

standards may be updated on a regular 

basis? 

Use of More Than One Standard or 

Conformity Assessment Procedure in a 

Regulation or Procurement Solicitation. 

OMB recognizes that, in some instances, 

it may be best, in terms of economic 

activity, if a regulation or procurement 

solicitation sets out a requirement that 

can be met by more than one standard 

and more than one conformity 

assessment procedure. In some cases, 

however, allowing the use of more than 

one standard or conformity assessment 

procedure may not be possible or meet 

the regulatory or procurement objective. 

For example, doing so may be precluded 

by statute, and an alternate standard or 

conformity assessment procedure may 

not provide an equivalent level of 

protection as the standard or conformity 

assessment procedure selected by the 

regulator. 

• Should OMB provide guidance to 

agencies on when it is appropriate to 

allow the use of more than one standard 

or more than one conformity assessment 

procedure to demonstrate conformity 

with regulatory requirements or 

solicitation provisions? 

• Where an agency is requested by 

stakeholders to consider allowing the 

demonstration of conformity to another 

country’s standard or the use of an 

alternate conformity assessment 

procedure as adequate to fulfilling U.S. 

requirements, should OMB provide 

guidance to agencies on how to consider 

such requests? 

Other Developments 

• Have there been any developments 

internationally—including but not 

limited to U.S. regulatory cooperation 

initiatives—since the publication of 

Circular A–119 that OMB should take 

into account in developing a possible 

supplement to the Circular? 

• Does the significant role played by 

consortia today in standards 

development in some technology areas 

have any bearing on (or specific 

implications for) Federal participation? 

• Are there other issues not set out 

above that OMB might usefully seek to 

address in a supplement? 

Cass Sunstein, 

Administrator, Office of Information and 

Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and 

Budget. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7602 Filed 3–29–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

MILLENNIUM CHALLENGE 

CORPORATION 

[MCC 12–04] 

Report on Countries That Are 

Candidates for Millennium Challenge 

Account Eligibility in Fiscal Year 2012 

and Countries That Would Be 

Candidates but for Legal Prohibitions 

AGENCY: Millennium Challenge 

Corporation. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: Section 608(d) of the 

Millennium Challenge Act of 2003 (the 

‘‘Act’’) requires the Millennium 

Challenge Corporation to publish a 

report that identifies countries that are 

‘‘candidate countries’’ for Millennium 

Challenge Account assistance during FY 

2012. In December 2011, Congress 

enacted changes in MCC’s FY 2012 

appropriation that redefined candidate 

countries for FY 2012 as part of the 

Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012 

(Pub. L. 112–74) (the ‘‘Appropriations 

Act’’).1 While this does not affect the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES