Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 45 / Monday, March 9, 2015 / Notices 12451 

occurred and the subsequent assessment 

of double antidumping duties. 

We are issuing and publishing these 

results in accordance with sections 

751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 

CFR 351.213. 

Dated: March 2, 2015. 

Paul Piquado, 

Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and 

Compliance. 

Appendix—List of Topics Discussed in 

the Preliminary Decision Memorandum 

1. Summary 

2. Background 

3. Scope of the Order 

4. Discussion of the Methodology 

a. Non-Market Economy Country Status 

b. Single-Entity Treatment 

c. Bona Fide Sale Analysis 

d. Separate Rates 

e. Surrogate Country 

f. Surrogate Value Comments 

g. Date of Sale 

h. Normal Value Comparisons 

i. Determination of the Comparison 

Method 

j. U.S. Price 

k. Normal Value 

l. Factor Valuations 

m. Currency Conversion 

5. Conclusion 

[FR Doc. 2015–05287 Filed 3–6–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Institute of Standards and 

Technology 

[Docket Number: 150302201–5201–01] 

RIN 0693–ZB09 

Award Competitions for Hollings 

Manufacturing Extension Partnership 

(MEP) Centers in the States of Alaska, 

Idaho, Illinois, Minnesota, New Jersey, 

New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, Utah, 

Washington, West Virginia and 

Wisconsin 

AGENCY: National Institute of Standards 

and Technology (NIST), United States 

Department of Commerce (DoC). 

ACTION: Notice of funding availability. 

SUMMARY: NIST invites applications 

from eligible organizations in 

connection with NIST’s funding up to 

twelve (12) separate MEP cooperative 

agreements for the operation of an MEP 

Center in the designated States’ service 

areas and in the funding amounts 

identified in the corresponding Federal 

Funding Opportunity (FFO). NIST 

anticipates awarding one (1) cooperative 

agreement for each of the identified 

States. The objective of the MEP Center 

Program is to provide manufacturing 

extension services to primarily small 

and medium-sized manufacturers 

within the whole State designated in the 

applications. The selected organization 

will become part of the MEP national 

system of extension service providers, 

currently comprised of more than 400 

Centers and field offices located 

throughout the United States and Puerto 

Rico. 

DATES: Electronic applications must be 

received no later than 11:59 p.m. 

Eastern Time on Monday, June 1, 2015. 

Paper applications will not be accepted. 

Applications received after the deadline 

will not be reviewed or considered. The 

approximate start date for awards under 

this notice and the corresponding FFO 

is expected to be January 1, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Applications must be 

submitted electronically through 

www.grants.gov. NIST will not accept 

applications submitted by mail, 

facsimile, or by email. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Administrative, budget, cost-sharing, 

and eligibility questions and other 

programmatic questions should be 

directed to Diane Henderson at Tel: 

(301) 975–5105; Email: mepffo@nist.gov; 

Fax: (301) 963–6556. Grants 

Administration questions should be 

addressed to: Jannet Cancino, Grants 

Management Division, National Institute 

of Standards and Technology, 100 

Bureau Drive, Stop 1650, Gaithersburg, 

MD 20899–1650; Tel: (301) 975–6544; 

Email: jannet.cancino@nist.gov; Fax: 

(301) 975–6368. For technical assistance 

with Grants.gov submissions contact 

Christopher Hunton at Tel: (301) 975– 

5718; Email: christopher.hunton@

nist.gov; Fax: (301) 975–8884. Questions 

submitted to NIST/MEP may be posted 

as part of an FAQ document, which will 

be periodically updated on the MEP 

Web site at http://nist.gov/mep/ffo-statecompetitions-02.cfm. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Electronic access: Applicants are 

strongly encouraged to read the 

corresponding FFO announcement 

available at www.grants.gov for 

complete information about this 

program, including all program 

requirements and instructions for 

applying electronically. Paper 

applications or electronic applications 

submitted other than through 

www.grants.gov will not be accepted. 

The FFO may be found by searching 

under the Catalog of Federal Domestic 

Assistance Name and Number provided 

below. 

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 278k, as implemented 

in 15 CFR part 290. 

Catalog of Federal Domestic 

Assistance Name and Number: 

Manufacturing Extension Partnership— 

11.611. 

Webinar Information Session: NIST/

MEP will hold one or more webinar 

information sessions for organizations 

that are considering applying for this 

funding opportunity. These webinars 

will provide general information 

regarding MEP and offer general 

guidance on preparing proposals. NIST/ 

MEP staff will be available at the 

webinars to answer general questions. 

During the webinars, proprietary 

technical discussions about specific 

project ideas will not be permitted. 

Also, NIST/MEP staff will not critique 

or provide feedback on any project ideas 

during the webinars or at any time 

before submission of a proposal to MEP. 

However, NIST/MEP staff will provide 

information about the MEP eligibility 

and cost-sharing requirements, 

evaluation criteria and selection factors, 

selection process, and the general 

characteristics of a competitive MEP 

proposal during this webinar. The 

webinars will be held approximately 

fifteen (15) to thirty (30) business days 

after posting of this notice and the 

corresponding FFO and publication of 

an abbreviated solicitation in the 

Federal Register. The exact dates and 

times of the webinars will be posted on 

the MEP Web site at http://nist.gov/

mep/ffo-state-competitions-02.cfm. The 

webinars will be recorded, and a link to 

the recordings will be posted on the 

MEP Web site. In addition, the webinar 

presentations will be available after the 

webinars on the MEP Web site. 

Organizations wishing to participate in 

one or more of the webinars must 

register in advance by contacting MEP 

by email at mepffo@nist.gov. 

Participation in the webinars is not 

required in order for an organization to 

submit an application pursuant to this 

notice and the corresponding FFO. 

Program Description: NIST invites 

applications from eligible organizations 

in connection with NIST’s funding up to 

twelve (12) separate MEP cooperative 

agreements for the operation of an MEP 

Center in the designated States’ service 

areas and in the funding amounts 

identified in Section II.2. of the 

corresponding FFO. NIST anticipates 

awarding one (1) cooperative agreement 

for each of the identified States. The 

objective of the MEP Center Program is 

to provide manufacturing extension 

services to primarily small and mediumsized manufacturers within the whole 

State designated in the applications. 

The selected organization will become 

part of the MEP national system of 

extension service providers, currently 

comprised of more than 400 Centers and 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

12452 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 45 / Monday, March 9, 2015 / Notices 

field offices located throughout the 

United States and Puerto Rico. 

See the corresponding FFO for further 

information about the Manufacturing 

Extension Partnership and the MEP 

National Network. 

The MEP Program is not a Federal 

research and development program. It is 

not the intent of the program that 

awardees will perform systematic 

research. 

To learn more about the MEP 

Program, please go to http://

www.nist.gov/mep/. 

Funding Availability: NIST 

anticipates funding twelve (12) MEP 

Center awards with an initial five-year 

period of performance in accordance 

with the multi-year funding policy 

described in Section II.3. of the 

corresponding FFO. Initial funding for 

the projects listed in the corresponding 

FFO is contingent upon the availability 

of appropriated funds. 

The table below lists the twelve (12) 

States identified for funding as part of 

this notice and the corresponding FFO 

and the estimated amount of funding 

available for each: 

MEP Center location and assigned geographical service area (by State) 

Annual Federal 

funding for each 

year of the 

award 

Total Federal 

funding for 5 

year award 

period 

Alaska .............................................................................................................................................................. $500,000 $2,500,000 

Idaho ................................................................................................................................................................ 640,236 3,201,180 

Illinois ............................................................................................................................................................... 5,029,910 25,149,550 

Minnesota ........................................................................................................................................................ 2,653,649 13,268,245 

New Jersey ...................................................................................................................................................... 2,814,432 14,072,160 

New York ......................................................................................................................................................... 5,985,194 29,925,970 

Ohio ................................................................................................................................................................. 5,246,822 26,234,110 

Oklahoma ......................................................................................................................................................... 1,309,080 6,545,400 

Utah ................................................................................................................................................................. 1,147,573 5,737,865 

Washington ...................................................................................................................................................... 2,534,872 12,674,360 

West Virginia .................................................................................................................................................... 500,000 2,500,000 

Wisconsin ......................................................................................................................................................... 3,250,792 16,253,960 

Applicants may propose annual 

Federal funding amounts that are 

different from the anticipated annual 

Federal funding amounts set forth in the 

above table; provided, that the total 

amount of Federal funding being 

requested by an Applicant does not 

exceed the total amount of federal 

funding for the five-year award period 

as set forth in the above table. For 

example, if the anticipated annual 

Federal funding amount for an MEP 

Center is $500,000 and the total Federal 

funding amount for the five-year award 

period is $2,500,000, an Applicant may 

propose Federal funding amounts 

greater, less than, or equal to $500,000 

for any year or years of the award, so 

long as the total amount of Federal 

funding being requested by the 

Applicant for the entire five-year award 

period does not exceed $2,500,000. 

Multi-Year Funding Policy. When an 

application for a multi-year award is 

approved, funding will usually be 

provided for only the first year of the 

project. Recipients will be required to 

submit detailed budgets and budget 

narratives prior to the award of any 

continued funding. Continued funding 

for the remaining years of the project 

will be awarded by NIST on a noncompetitive basis, and may be adjusted 

higher or lower from year-to-year of the 

award, contingent upon satisfactory 

performance, continued relevance to the 

mission and priorities of the program, 

and the availability of funds. 

Continuation of an award to extend the 

period of performance and/or to 

increase or decrease funding is at the 

sole discretion of NIST. 

Potential for Additional 5 Years. 

Initial awards issued pursuant to this 

notice and corresponding FFO are 

expected to be for up to five (5) years 

with the possibility for NIST to renew 

the award, on a non-competitive basis, 

for an additional 5 years at the end of 

the initial award period. The review 

processes in 15 CFR 290.8 will be used 

as part of the overall assessment of the 

recipient, consistent with the potential 

long-term nature and purpose of the 

program. In considering renewal for a 

second five-year, multi-year award term, 

NIST will evaluate the results of the 

annual reviews and the results of the 

3rd Year peer-based Panel Review 

findings and recommendations as set 

forth in 15 CFR 290.8, as well as the 

Center’s progress in addressing findings 

and recommendations made during the 

various reviews. The full process is 

expected to include programmatic, 

policy, financial, administrative, and 

responsibility assessments, and the 

availability of funds, consistent with 

Department of Commerce and NIST 

policies and procedures in effect at that 

time. 

Kick-Off Conferences 

Each recipient will be required to 

attend a kick-off conference, which will 

be held at the beginning of the project 

period, to help ensure that the MEP 

Center operator has a clear 

understanding of the program and its 

components. The kick-off conference 

will take place at NIST/MEP 

headquarters in Gaithersburg, MD, 

during which time NIST will: (1) Orient 

MEP Center key personnel to the MEP 

program; (2) explain program and 

financial reporting requirements and 

procedures; (3) identify available 

resources that can enhance the 

capabilities of the MEP Center; and (4) 

negotiate and develop a detailed threeyear operating plan with the recipient. 

NIST/MEP anticipates an additional set 

of site visits at the MEP Center and/or 

telephonic meetings with the recipient 

to finalize the three-year operating plan. 

The kick-off conference will take up 

to approximately 5 days and must be 

attended by the MEP Center Director, 

along with up to two additional MEP 

Center employees. Applicants must 

include travel and related costs for the 

kick-off conference as part of the budget 

for year one (1), and these costs should 

be reflected in the SF–424A covering 

the first four (4) years of the project. 

(See Section IV.2.a.(2). of the 

corresponding FFO.) These costs must 

also be reflected in the budget table and 

budget narrative for year 1, which is 

submitted as part of the budget tables 

and budget narratives section of the 

Technical Proposal. (See Section 

IV.2.a.(6).(e). of the corresponding FFO.) 

Representatives from key subrecipients 

and other key strategic partners may 

attend the kick-off conference with the 

prior written approval of the Grants 

Officer. Applicants proposing to have 

key subrecipients and/or other key 

strategic partners attend the kick-off 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 45 / Monday, March 9, 2015 / Notices 12453 

conference should clearly indicate so as 

part of the budget narrative for year one 

of the project. 

MEP System-Wide Meetings 

NIST/MEP typically organizes systemwide meetings approximately four times 

a year in an effort to share best 

practices, new and emerging trends, and 

additional topics of interest. These 

meetings are rotated throughout the 

United States and typically involve 3– 

4 days of resource time and associated 

travel costs for each meeting. The MEP 

Center Director must attend these 

meetings, along with up to two 

additional MEP Center employees. 

Applicants must include travel and 

related costs for four quarterly MEP 

system-wide meetings in each of the five 

(5) project years (4 meetings per year; 20 

total meetings over five-year award 

period). These costs must be reflected in 

the SF–424A covering the first four (4) 

years of the project (see Section 

IV.2.a.(2). of the corresponding FFO) 

and in the SF–424A covering year five 

(5) of the project (see Section IV.2.a.(10). 

of the corresponding FFO). These costs 

must also be reflected in the budget 

tables and budget narratives for each of 

the project’s five (5) years, which are 

submitted in the budget tables and 

budget narratives section of the 

Technical Proposal. (See Section 

IV.2.a.(6).(e). of the corresponding FFO). 

Cost Share or Matching Requirement: 

Non-Federal cost sharing of at least 50 

percent of the total project costs is 

required for each of the first through the 

third year of the award, with an 

increasing minimum non-federal cost 

share contribution beginning in year 4 

of the award as follows: 

Award year 

Maximum 

NIST 

share 

Minimum nonFederal share 

1–3 .................. 1/2 1/2 

4 ...................... 2/5 3/5 

5 and beyond .. 1/3 2/3 

Non-Federal cost sharing is that 

portion of the project costs not borne by 

the Federal Government. The 

applicant’s share of the MEP Center 

expenses may include cash, services, 

and third party in-kind contributions, as 

described at 2 CFR 200.306, as 

applicable, and in the MEP program 

regulations at 15 CFR 290.4(c). No more 

than 50% of the applicant’s total nonFederal cost share for any year of the 

award may be from third party in-kind 

contributions of part-time personnel, 

equipment, software, rental value of 

centrally located space, and related 

contributions, per 15 CFR 290.4(c)(5). 

The source and detailed rationale of the 

cost share, including cash, full- and 

part-time personnel, and in-kind 

donations, must be documented in the 

budget tables and budget narratives 

submitted with the application and will 

be considered as part of the review 

under the evaluation criterion found in 

Section V.1.c.ii. of the corresponding 

FFO. 

Recipients must meet the minimum 

non-federal cost share requirements for 

each year of the award as identified in 

the chart above. For purposes of the 

MEP Program, ‘‘program income’’ (as 

defined in 2 CFR 200.80, as applicable) 

generated by an MEP Center may be 

used by a recipient towards the required 

non-federal cost share under an MEP 

award. 

As with the Federal share, any 

proposed costs included as non-Federal 

cost sharing must be an allowable/

eligible cost under this program and 

under the Federal cost principles set 

forth in 2 CFR part 200, subpart E. NonFederal cost sharing incorporated into 

the budget of an approved MEP 

cooperative agreement is subject to 

audit in the same general manner as 

Federal award funds. See 2 CFR part 

200, subpart F. 

As set forth in Section IV.2.a.(7) of the 

corresponding FFO, a letter of 

commitment is required from an 

authorized representative of the 

applicant, stating the total amount of 

cost share to be contributed by the 

applicant towards the proposed MEP 

Center. Letters of commitment for all 

other third-party sources of non-Federal 

cost sharing identified in a proposal are 

not required, but are strongly 

encouraged. 

Eligibility: The eligibility 

requirements given in this section of the 

FFO will be used in lieu of those given 

in the MEP regulations found at 15 CFR 

part 290, specifically 15 CFR 290.5(a)(1). 

Each applicant for and recipient of an 

MEP award must be a U.S.-based 

nonprofit institution or organization. 

For the purpose of this notice and the 

corresponding FFO, nonprofit 

institutions include public and private 

nonprofit organizations, nonprofit or 

State colleges and universities, public or 

nonprofit community and technical 

colleges, and State, local or Tribal 

governments. Existing MEP awardees 

and new applicants that meet the 

eligibility criteria set forth in Section 

III.1. of the corresponding FFO may 

apply. An eligible organization may 

work individually or may include 

proposed subawards to eligible 

organizations or proposed contracts 

with any other organization as part of 

the applicant’s proposal, effectively 

forming a team. However, as discussed 

in Section III.3.a. of the corresponding 

FFO, NIST generally will not fund 

applications that propose an 

organizational or operational structure 

that, in whole or in part, delegates or 

transfers to another person, institution, 

or organization the applicant’s 

responsibility for core MEP Center 

management and oversight functions. 

Application Requirements: 

Applications must be submitted in 

accordance with the requirements set 

forth in Section IV. of the corresponding 

FFO announcement. Also see Sections 

IV.b.(1)., IV.b.(2)., and IV.b.(7). in the 

Full Announcement Text of the 

corresponding FFO. 

Application/Review Information: The 

evaluation criteria, selection factors, and 

review and selection process provided 

in this section will be used for this 

competition in lieu of those provided in 

the MEP regulations found at 15 CFR 

part 290, specifically 15 CFR 290.6 and 

290.7. 

Evaluation Criteria: The evaluation 

criteria that will be used in evaluating 

applications and assigned weights, with 

a maximum score of 100, are listed 

below. 

a. Executive Summary and Project 

Narrative. (40 points; Sub-criteria i 

through iv will be weighted equally) 

NIST/MEP will evaluate the extent to 

which the applicant’s Executive 

Summary and Project Narrative 

demonstrates how the applicant’s 

methodology will efficiently and 

effectively establish an MEP Center and 

provide manufacturing extension 

services to primarily small and mediumsized manufacturers in the applicable 

State-wide geographical service area 

identified in Section II.2. of the 

corresponding FFO. Applicants should 

name the state to be covered in the first 

sentence of the Executive Summary and 

Project Narrative. Reviewers will 

consider the following topics when 

evaluating the Executive Summary and 

Project Narrative: 

i. Center Strategy. Reviewers will 

assess the applicant’s strategy proposed 

for the Center to deliver services that 

support a strong manufacturing 

ecosystem, meet manufacturers’ needs 

and generate impact. Reviewers will 

assess the quality with which the 

applicant: 

• Incorporates the market analysis 

described in the criterion V.1.a.ii.(1). 

below to inform strategies, products and 

services; 

• defines a strategy for delivering 

services that balances market 

penetration with impact and revenue 

generation, addressing the needs of 

manufacturers, with an emphasis on the 

small and medium-sized manufacturers; 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

12454 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 45 / Monday, March 9, 2015 / Notices 

• defines the Center’s existing and/or 

proposed roles and relationships with 

other entities in the State’s 

manufacturing ecosystem, including 

State, regional, and local agencies, 

economic development organizations 

and educational institutions such as 

universities and community or technical 

colleges, industry associations, and 

other appropriate entities; 

• plans to engage with other entities 

in Statewide and/or regional advanced 

manufacturing initiatives; and 

• supports achievements of the MEP 

mission and objectives while also 

satisfying the interests of other 

stakeholders, investors, and partners. 

ii. Market Understanding. Reviewers 

will assess the strategy proposed for the 

Center to define the target market, 

understand the needs of manufacturers 

(especially Small Medium Enterprises 

(SMEs)), and to define appropriate 

services to meet identified needs. 

Reviewers will evaluate the proposed 

approach for regularly updating this 

understanding through the five years. 

The following sub-topics will be 

evaluated and given equal weight: 

(1) Market Segmentation. Reviewers 

will assess the quality and extent of the 

applicant’s market segmentation 

including: 

• Company size, geography, industry 

including a segmentation of rural, 

emerging, start-up and very small 

manufacturers as appropriate to the 

state; 

• alignment with state and/or 

regional initiatives; and 

• other important factors identified 

by the applicant. 

(2) Needs Identification and Product/ 

Service Offerings. Reviewers will assess 

the quality and extent of the applicant’s 

proposed needs identification and 

proposed products and services for both 

sales growth and operational 

improvement in response to the 

applicant’s market segmentation and 

understanding assessed by reviewers 

under the preceding Section V.1.a.ii.1. 

Of particular interest is how the 

applicant would leverage new 

manufacturing technologies, techniques 

and processes usable by small and 

medium-sized manufacturers. 

Reviewers will also consider how an 

applicant’s proposed approach will 

support a job-driven training agenda 

with manufacturing clients. 

iii. Business Model. Reviewers will 

assess the applicant’s proposed business 

model for the Center as the applicant 

provides in its Project Narrative, 

Qualifications of the Applicant; Key 

Personnel, Organizational Structure and 

Budget Tables and Budget Narratives 

sections of its Technical Proposal, 

submitted under section IV.2.a.(6). of 

the corresponding FFO, and the 

proposed business model’s ability to 

execute the strategy evaluated under 

criterion V.1.a.i. above, based on the 

market understanding evaluated under 

criterion V.1.a.ii. above. The following 

sub-topics will be evaluated and given 

equal weight: 

(1) Outreach and Service Delivery to 

the Market. Reviewers will assess the 

extent to which the proposed Center is 

organized to: 

• Identify, reach and provide 

proposed services to key market 

segments and individual manufacturers 

described above; 

• work with a manufacturer’s 

leadership in strategic discussions 

related to new technologies, new 

products and new markets; and 

• leverage the applicant’s past 

experience in working with small and 

medium-sized manufacturers as a basis 

for future programmatic success. 

(2) Partnership Leverage and 

Linkages. Reviewers will assess the 

extent to which the proposed Center 

will make effective use of resources or 

partnerships with third parties such as 

industry, universities, community/

technical colleges, nonprofit economic 

development organizations, and 

Federal, State and Local Government 

Agencies in the Center’s business 

model. 

iv. Performance Measurement and 

Management. Reviewers will assess the 

extent to which the applicant will use 

a systematic approach to measuring and 

managing performance including the: 

• Quality and extent of the 

applicant’s stated goals, milestones and 

outcomes described by operating year 

(year 1, year 2, etc.); 

• applicant’s utilization of clientbased business results important to 

stakeholders in understanding program 

impact; and 

• depth of the proposed methodology 

for program management and internal 

evaluation likely to ensure effective 

operations and oversight for meeting 

program and service delivery objectives. 

b. Qualifications of the Applicant; Key 

Personnel and Organizational Structure 

(30 points; Sub-criteria i and ii will be 

weighted equally). Reviewers will assess 

the ability of the key personnel and the 

applicant’s management structure to 

deliver the program and services 

envisioned for the Center. Reviewers 

will consider the following topics when 

evaluating the qualifications of the 

applicant and of program management: 

i. Key Personnel. Reviewers will 

assess the extent to which the: 

• Proposed key personnel have the 

appropriate experience and education in 

manufacturing, outreach and 

partnership development to support 

achievements of the MEP mission and 

objectives; 

• proposed key personnel have the 

appropriate experience and education to 

plan, direct, monitor, organize and 

control the monetary resources of the 

proposed Center to achieve its business 

objectives and maximize its value; 

• proposed staffing plan flows 

logically from the specified approach to 

the market and products and service 

offerings; and 

• proposed field staff structure 

sufficiently supports the geographic 

concentrations and industry targets for 

the region. 

ii. Organizational Structure. 

Reviewers will assess the extent to 

which the: 

• Proposed management structure 

(leadership and governance) is aligned 

to support the execution of the strategy, 

products and services; 

• organizational roles and 

responsibilities of key personnel and 

staff are clearly delineated; and 

• degree to which the Center’s 

proposed oversight board meets the 

requirements of Section III.3.b. of the 

corresponding FFO or, if such a 

structure is not currently in place or is 

not expected to continue meet these 

requirements at the time of the MEP 

award, a feasible plan is proposed for 

developing such an oversight board 

within 12 months of issuance of an MEP 

award (expected to be January 2016). 

c. Budget and Financial Plan. (30 

points; Sub-criteria i and ii will be 

weighted equally) Reviewers will assess 

the suitability and focus of the 

applicant’s five (5) year budget. The 

application will be assessed in the 

following areas: 

i. Budget. Reviewers will assess the 

extent to which: 

• The proposed financial plan is 

aligned to support the execution of the 

proposed Center’s strategy and business 

model over the five (5) year project plan; 

• the proposed projections for income 

and expenditures are appropriate for the 

scale of services that are to be delivered 

by the proposed Center and the service 

delivery model envisioned within the 

context of the overall financial model 

over the five (5) year project plan; 

• a reasonable ramp-up or scale-up 

scope and budget that has the Center 

fully operational by the 4th year of the 

project; and 

• the proposal’s narrative for each of 

the budgeted items explains the 

rationale for each of the budgeted items, 

including assumptions the applicant 

used in budgeting for the Center. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 45 / Monday, March 9, 2015 / Notices 12455 

ii. Quality of the Financial Plan for 

Meeting the Award’s Non-Federal Cost 

Share Requirements over 5 Years. 

Reviewers will assess the quality of and 

extent to which the: 

• Applicant clearly describes the total 

level of cost share and detailed rationale 

of the cost share, including cash and inkind, in their proposed budget. 

• applicant’s funding commitments 

for cost share are documented by letters 

of support from the applicant, proposed 

sub-recipients and any other partners 

identified and meet the basic matching 

requirements of the program; 

• applicant’s cost share meets basic 

requirements of allowability, 

allocability and reasonableness under 

applicable federal costs principles set 

for in 2 CFR part 200, subpart E; 

• applicant’s underlying accounting 

system is established or will be 

established to meet applicable federal 

costs principles set for in 2 CFR part 

200, subpart E; and 

• the overall proposed financial plan 

is sufficiently robust and diversified so 

as to support the long term 

sustainability of the Center throughout 

the five (5) years of the project plan. 

Selection Factors: The Selection 

Factors for this notice and the 

corresponding FFO are as follows: 

a. The availability of Federal funds; 

b. Relevance of the proposed project 

to MEP program goals and policy 

objectives; 

c. Reviewers’ evaluations, including 

technical comments; 

d. The need to assure appropriate 

distribution of MEP services within the 

designated State; 

e. Whether the project duplicates 

other projects funded by DoC or by 

other Federal agencies; and 

f. Whether the application 

complements or supports other 

Administration priorities, or projects 

supported by DoC or other Federal 

agencies, such as but not limited to the 

National Network for Manufacturing 

Innovation and the Investing in 

Manufacturing Communities 

Partnership. 

Review and Selection Process 

Proposals, reports, documents and 

other information related to applications 

submitted to NIST and/or relating to 

financial assistance awards issued by 

NIST will be reviewed and considered 

by Federal employees, Federal agents 

and contractors, and/or by non-Federal 

personnel enter into nondisclosure 

agreements covering such information. 

(1) Initial Administrative Review of 

Applications. An initial review of 

timely received applications will be 

conducted to determine eligibility, 

completeness, and responsiveness to 

this notice and the corresponding FFO 

and the scope of the stated program 

objectives. Applications determined to 

be ineligible, incomplete, and/or nonresponsive may be eliminated from 

further review. However, NIST, in its 

sole discretion, may continue the review 

process for an application that is 

missing non-substantive information 

that can easily be rectified or cured. 

(2) Full Review of Eligible, Complete, 

and Responsive Applications. 

Applications that are determined to be 

eligible, complete, and responsive will 

proceed for full reviews in accordance 

with the review and selection processes 

below. Eligible, complete and 

responsive applications will be grouped 

by the State in which the proposed MEP 

Center is to be established. The 

applications in each group will be 

reviewed by the same reviewers and 

will be evaluated, reviewed, and 

selected as described below in separate 

groups. 

(3) Evaluation and Review. Each 

application will be reviewed by at least 

three technically qualified individual 

reviewers who will evaluate each 

application based on the evaluation 

criteria (see Section V.1. of the 

corresponding FFO). Applicants may 

receive written follow-up questions in 

order for the reviewers to gain a better 

understanding of the applicant’s 

proposal. Each reviewer will assign each 

application a numeric score, with a 

maximum score of 100. If a non-Federal 

reviewer is used, the reviewers may 

discuss the applications with each 

other, but scores will be determined on 

an individual basis, not as a consensus. 

Applicants whose applications 

receive an average score of 70 or higher 

out of 100 will be deemed finalists. If 

deemed necessary, all finalists will be 

invited to participate with reviewers in 

a conference call and/or all finalists will 

be invited to participate in a site visit 

that will be conducted by the same 

reviewers at the applicant’s location. 

Finalists will be reviewed and 

evaluated, and reviewers may revise 

their assigned numeric scores based on 

the evaluation criteria (see Section V.1. 

of the corresponding FFO) as a result of 

the conference call and/or site visit. 

(b) Ranking and Selection. The 

reviewers’ final numeric scores for all 

finalists will be converted to ordinal 

rankings (i.e., a reviewer’s highest score 

will be ranked ‘‘1’’, second highest score 

will be ranked ‘‘2’’, etc.). The ordinal 

rankings for an applicant will be 

summed and rank order will be 

established based on the lowest total for 

the ordinal rankings, and provided to 

the Selecting Official for further 

consideration. 

The Selecting Official is the NIST 

Associate Director of Innovation and 

Industry Services or designee. The 

Selecting Official makes the final 

recommendation to the NIST Grants 

Officer regarding the funding of 

applications under this notice and the 

corresponding FFO. NIST/MEP expects 

to recommend funding for the highest 

ranked applicant for each of the twelve 

(12) States being competed under this 

notice and the corresponding FFO. 

However, the Selecting Official may 

decide to select an applicant out of rank 

order based upon one or more of the 

Selection Factors identified in Section 

V.3. of the corresponding FFO. The 

Selecting Official may also decide not to 

recommend funding for a particular 

State to any of the applicants. 

NIST reserves the right to negotiate 

the budget costs with any applicant 

selected to receive an award, which may 

include requesting that the applicant 

remove certain costs. Additionally, 

NIST may request that the successful 

applicant modify objectives or work 

plans and provide supplemental 

information required by the agency 

prior to award. NIST also reserves the 

right to reject an application where 

information is uncovered that raises a 

reasonable doubt as to the responsibility 

of the applicant. The final approval of 

selected applications and issuance of 

awards will be by the NIST Grants 

Officer. The award decisions of the 

NIST Grants Officer are final. 

Anticipated Announcement and 

Award Date. Review, selection, and 

award processing is expected to be 

completed in late 2015. The anticipated 

start date for awards made under this 

notice and the corresponding FFO is 

expected to be January 2016. 

Additional Information 

a. Application Replacement Pages. 

Applicants may not submit replacement 

pages and/or missing documents once 

an application has been submitted. Any 

revisions must be made by submission 

of a new application that must be 

received by NIST by the submission 

deadline. 

b. Notification to Unsuccessful 

Applicants. Unsuccessful applicants 

will be notified in writing. 

c. Retention of Unsuccessful 

Applications. An electronic copy of 

each non-selected application will be 

retained for three (3) years for record 

keeping purposes. After three (3) years, 

it will be destroyed. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

12456 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 45 / Monday, March 9, 2015 / Notices 

Administrative and National Policy 

Requirements 

Uniform Administrative 

Requirements, Cost Principles and 

Audit Requirements: Through 2 CFR 

1327.101, the Department of Commerce 

adopted the Uniform Administrative 

Requirements, Cost Principles, and 

Audit Requirements for Federal Awards 

at 2 CFR part 200, which apply to 

awards made pursuant to this FFO. 

Refer to http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/

text-idx?SID=bd58a13de66200ce25c4fa

5f6fdbf197&node=pt2.1.200&rgn=div5 

and http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/textidx?SID=bd58a13de66200ce25c4fa

5f6fdbf197&node=pt2.1.1327&rgn=div5. 

The Department of Commerce PreAward Notification Requirements: The 

Department of Commerce Pre-Award 

Notification Requirements for Grants 

and Cooperative Agreements, 79 FR 

78390 (December 30, 2014), are 

applicable to this notice and the 

corresponding FFO and are available at 

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2014- 

12-30/pdf/2014-30297.pdf. 

Unique Entity Identifier and System 

for Award Management (SAM): 

Pursuant to 2 CFR part 25, applicants 

and recipients (as the case may be) are 

required to: (i) Be registered in SAM 

before submitting its application; (ii) 

provide a valid unique entity identifier 

in its application; and (iii) continue to 

maintain an active SAM registration 

with current information at all times 

during which it has an active Federal 

award or an application or plan under 

consideration by a Federal awarding 

agency, unless otherwise excepted from 

these requirements pursuant to 2 CFR 

25.110. NIST will not make a Federal 

award to an applicant until the 

applicant has complied with all 

applicable unique entity identifier and 

SAM requirements and, if an applicant 

has not fully complied with the 

requirements by the time that NIST is 

ready to make a Federal award pursuant 

to this notice and the corresponding 

FFO, NIST may determine that the 

applicant is not qualified to receive a 

Federal award and use that 

determination as a basis for making a 

Federal award to another applicant. 

Paperwork Reduction Act: The 

standard forms in the application kit 

involve a collection of information 

subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act. 

The use of Standard Forms 424, 424A, 

424B, SF–LLL, and CD–346 have been 

approved by OMB under the respective 

Control Numbers 0348–0043, 0348– 

0044, 0348–0040, 0348–0046, and 0605– 

0001. MEP program-specific application 

requirements have been approved by 

OMB under Control Number 0693–0056. 

Notwithstanding any other provision 

of the law, no person is required to 

respond to, nor shall any person be 

subject to a penalty for failure to comply 

with, a collection of information subject 

to the requirements of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act, unless that collection of 

information displays a currently valid 

OMB Control Number. 

Certifications Regarding Federal 

Felony and Federal Criminal Tax 

Convictions, Unpaid Federal Tax 

Assessments and Delinquent Federal 

Tax Returns. In accordance with Federal 

appropriations law, an authorized 

representative of the selected 

applicant(s) may be required to provide 

certain pre-award certifications 

regarding federal felony and federal 

criminal tax convictions, unpaid federal 

tax assessments, and delinquent federal 

tax returns. 

Funding Availability and Limitation 

of Liability: Funding for the program 

listed in this notice and the 

corresponding FFO is contingent upon 

the availability of appropriations. In no 

event will NIST or DoC be responsible 

for application preparation costs if this 

program fails to receive funding or is 

cancelled because of agency priorities. 

Publication of this notice and the 

corresponding FFO does not oblige 

NIST or DoC to award any specific 

project or to obligate any available 

funds. 

Other Administrative and National 

Policy Requirements: Additional 

administrative and national policy 

requirements are set forth in Section 

VI.2. of the corresponding FFO. 

Executive Order 12866: This funding 

notice was determined to be not 

significant for purposes of Executive 

Order 12866. 

Executive Order 13132 (Federalism): 

It has been determined that this notice 

does not contain policies with 

federalism implications as that term is 

defined in Executive Order 13132. 

Executive Order 12372: Proposals 

under this program are not subject to 

Executive Order 12372, 

‘‘Intergovernmental Review of Federal 

Programs.’’ 

Administrative Procedure Act/

Regulatory Flexibility Act: Notice and 

comment are not required under the 

Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 

553) or any other law, for matters 

relating to public property, loans, 

grants, benefits or contracts (5 U.S.C. 

553(a)). Moreover, because notice and 

comment are not required under 5 

U.S.C. 553, or any other law, for matters 

relating to public property, loans, 

grants, benefits or contracts (5 U.S.C. 

553(a)), a Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis is not required and has not 

been prepared for this notice, 5 U.S.C. 

601 et seq. 

Kevin Kimball, 

Chief of Staff. 

[FR Doc. 2015–05297 Filed 3–6–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–580–868] 

Large Residential Washers From the 

Republic of Korea: Preliminary Results 

of the Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review; 2012–2014 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(the Department) is conducting an 

administrative review of the 

antidumping duty order on large 

residential washers from the Republic of 

Korea. The period of review (POR) is 

August 3, 2012, through January 31, 

2014. The review covers three producers 

and exporters of the subject 

merchandise, Daewoo Electronics 

Corporation (Daewoo), LG Electronics, 

Inc. (LGE), and Samsung Electronics 

Co., Ltd. (Samsung). We preliminarily 

determine that sales of subject 

merchandise have been made at prices 

below normal value. Interested parties 

are invited to comment on these 

preliminary results. 

DATES: Effective Date: March 9, 2015. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

David Goldberger or Reza Karamloo, 

AD/CVD Operations, Office II, 

Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 

Street and Constitution Avenue NW., 

Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 

482–4136 or (202) 482–4470, 

respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Scope of the Order 

The products covered by the order are 

all large residential washers and certain 

subassemblies thereof from Korea. The 

products are currently classifiable under 

subheadings 8450.20.0040 and 

8450.20.0080 of the Harmonized Tariff 

System of the United States (HTSUS). 

Products subject to this order may also 

enter under HTSUS subheadings 

8450.11.0040, 8450.11.0080, 

8450.90.2000, and 8450.90.6000. 

Although the HTSUS subheadings are 

provided for convenience and customs 

purposes, the written description of the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES