Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 62 / Monday, April 1, 2013 / Notices 19467 

updated for usability and consistency. 

The most significant changes on the 

form are as follows: Block 1 

classification has been clarified to 

include activated National Guard 

members on State orders and U.S. 

citizens who have never resided in the 

United States. These individuals had 

previously been listed as U.S. citizens 

otherwise granted military/overseas 

voting rights. The overseas citizen 

selection previously described as ‘‘I am 

a U.S. citizen residing outside the U.S., 

and I do not intend to return’’ has been 

reworded for citizens who are unsure of 

their future plans or are hesitant to sign 

that they do not intend to return to the 

country. The intent-to-return language 

remains on the form due to the October 

2008 National Association Secretaries of 

State (NASS) Survey of State Statues 

that shows the majority of States have 

intent as a prerequisite for obtaining a 

State ballot. Block 7 has been reworded 

back to the 2005 FPCA language of ‘‘my 

voting residence address’’ to ensure 

military voters with more than one 

potential U.S. address are not registering 

in the wrong jurisdiction. Block 8 has 

been reworded to ‘‘where to send my 

ballot’’ to ensure voters are using their 

mailing address and not their U.S. 

voting address. The Affirmation has 

been modified so that voters do not have 

to reaffirm information already found on 

the form. The signature block has been 

highlighted and the text previously 

found on the signature and date lines 

has been moved below it so local 

election officials can easily read 

signatures and dates. The Agency 

Disclosure Statement has been added to 

the instruction page of the form as per 

OMB guidance. 

Dated: March 25, 2013. 

Aaron Siegel, 

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison 

Officer, Department of Defense. 

[FR Doc. 2013–07485 Filed 3–29–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System 

[Docket Number DARS–2013–0010] 

Information Collection Requirement; 

Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement (DFARS); DoD 

Pilot Mentor-Prote ́ge ́ Program 

AGENCY: Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System, Department of 

Defense (DoD). 

ACTION: Notice and request for 

comments regarding a proposed 

extension of an approved information 

collection requirement. 

SUMMARY: In compliance with Section 

3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 

Chapter 35), DoD announces the 

proposed extension of a public 

information collection requirement and 

seeks public comment on the provisions 

thereof. DoD invites comments on: (a) 

Whether the proposed collection of 

information is necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of DoD, 

including whether the information will 

have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of 

the estimate of the burden of the 

proposed information collection; (c) 

ways to enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and (d) ways to minimize the 

burden of the information collection on 

respondents, including the use of 

automated collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology. 

The Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) has approved this information 

collection for use through August 31, 

2013. DoD proposes that OMB extend its 

approval for use for three additional 

years beyond the current expiration 

date. 

DATES: DoD will consider all comments 

received by May 31, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by OMB Control Number 

0704–0332, using any of the following 

methods: 

Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Email: dfars@osd.mil. Include OMB 

Control Number 0704–0441 in the 

subject line of the message. 

Fax: 571–372–6094. 

Mail: Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System, Attn: Ms. Lee Renna, 

OUSD(AT&L)DPAP(DARS), 3060 

Defense Pentagon, Room 3B855, 

Washington, DC 20301–3060. 

Comments received generally will be 

posted without change to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Lee Renna, 571–372–6095. The 

information collection requirements 

addressed in this notice are available on 

the World Wide Web at: http:// 

www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/dars/dfarspgi/ 

current/index.html. Paper copies are 

available from Ms. Lee Renna, 

OUSD(AT&L)DPAP(DARS), 3060 

Defense Pentagon, Room 3B855, 

Washington, DC 20301–3060. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Title, Associated Form, and OMB 

Number: Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement (DFARS), 

Appendix I, DoD Pilot Mentor-Protege 

Program; OMB Control Number 0704– 

0332. 

Needs and Uses: DoD needs this 

information to evaluate whether the 

purposes of the DoD Pilot MentorProtege Program have been met. The 

purposes of the Program are to (1) 

provide incentives to major DoD 

contractors to assist protege firms in 

enhancing their capabilities to satisfy 

contract and subcontract requirements; 

(2) increase the overall participation of 

protege firms as subcontractors and 

suppliers; and (3) foster the 

establishment of long-term business 

relationships between protege firms and 

major DoD contractors. This Program 

implements Section 831 of the National 

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 1991 (Pub. L. 101–510) and Section 

811 of the National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 

(Public Law 106–65) (10 U.S.C. 2302 

note). Participation in the Program is 

voluntary. 

Affected Public: Businesses or other 

for-profit and not-for profit institutions. 

Number of Respondents: 115. 

Responses per Respondent: 1.96. 

Annual responses: 225. 

Average Burden per Response: 

Approximately 1 hour. 

Annual Burden Hours for Responses: 

225. 

Total Recordkeeping Hours: 357. 

Annual Burden Hours: 582. 

Frequency: Semiannually (mentor); 

Annually (prote ́ge ́). 

Summary of Information Collection 

DFARS Appendix I–112.2(a)–(d) 

requires mentor firms to report on the 

progress made under active mentorprotege agreements semiannually for the 

periods ending March 31st and 

September 30th. The September 30th 

report must address the entire fiscal 

year. Reports must include— 

(1) Data on performance under the 

mentor-protege agreement, including 

dollars obligated, expenditures, credit 

taken under the Program, applicable 

subcontract awards under DoD 

contracts, developmental assistance 

provided, impact of the agreement, and 

progress of the agreement; and 

(2) For each contract where 

developmental assistance was credited 

toward an SDB subcontracting goal, a 

copy of the Individual Subcontracting 

Report (ISR) or SF 294, and/or the 

Summary Subcontracting Report (SSR) 

or SF 295, with a statement 

identifying— 

(i) The amount of dollars credited to 

the applicable subcontracting goal as a 

result of developmental assistance 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
19468 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 62 / Monday, April 1, 2013 / Notices 

provided to protege firms under the 

Program; and 

(ii) The number and dollar value of 

subcontracts awarded to the protege 

firm(s), broken out per protege. 

DFARS Appendix I–112.2(e) requires 

the protege firm to annually provide 

data by October 31st on the progress 

made by the protege firm in 

employment, revenues, and 

participation in DoD contracts during 

each fiscal year of the Program 

participation term and each of the two 

fiscal years following the expiration of 

the Program participation term. During 

the Program participation term, the 

firms may provide this data as part of 

the mentor report required by I–112.2(a) 

for the period ending September 30th. 

Kortnee Stewart, 

Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System. 

[FR Doc. 2013–07462 Filed 3–29–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

Applications for New Awards; Minority 

Science and Engineering Improvement 

Program 

AGENCY: Office of Postsecondary 

Education, Department of Education 

ACTION: Notice. 

Overview Information: 

Minority Science and Engineering 

Improvement Program (MSEIP) . 

Notice inviting applications for new 

awards for fiscal year (FY) 2013. 

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 

(CFDA) Number: 84.120A. 

DATES: Applications Available: April 1, 

2013. 

Deadline for Transmittal of 

Applications: May 31, 2013. 

Deadline for Intergovernmental 

Review: July 30, 2013. 

Full Text of Announcement 

I. Funding Opportunity Description 

Purpose of Program: The MSEIP is 

designed to effect long-range 

improvement in science and 

engineering education at predominantly 

minority institutions and to increase the 

flow of underrepresented ethnic 

minorities, particularly minority 

women, into scientific and 

technological careers. 

Priorities: This notice contains one 

competitive preference priority and two 

invitational priorities. The competitive 

preference priority is from the notice of 

final supplemental priorities and 

definitions for discretionary grant 

programs, published in the Federal 

Register on December 15, 2010 (75 FR 

78486), and corrected on May 12, 2011 

(76 FR 27637). 

Competitive Preference Priority: For 

FY 2013 and any subsequent year in 

which we make awards from the list of 

unfunded applicants from this 

competition, this priority is a 

competitive preference priority. Under 

34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i), we will award an 

additional two points to an application 

that meets this competitive preference 

priority. 

This priority is: 

Competitive Preference Priority: 

Increasing Postsecondary Success. 

Projects that are designed to address 

the following priority area: 

Increasing the number and proportion 

of high-need students (as defined in this 

notice) who persist in and complete 

college or other postsecondary 

education and training. 

Note: Applicants seeking to address the 

competitive priority must do so in the 

context of meeting all other program 

requirements, including those provisions 

requiring a focus on science and engineering 

education in the grants funded under this 

program. Applicants should also consider 

how all elements of their proposed project 

contribute to the priority. 

Invitational Priorities: For FY 2013 

and any subsequent year in which we 

make awards from the list of unfunded 

applicants from this competition, these 

priorities are invitational priorities. 

Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(1), we do not 

give an application that meets these 

invitational priorities a competitive or 

absolute preference over other 

applications. 

These priorities are: 

Invitational Priority 1: Institutionalize 

Practices that have Evidence of Success. 

Building institutional capacity to effect 

long-range improvement in science and 

engineering education through projects 

that are supported by strong or moderate 

evidence of effectiveness (as defined in 

this notice). 

Invitational Priority 2: Improve STEM 

Education in the First Two Years of 

College. 

This invitational priority invites 

applications to eliminate systemic 

problems and impediments that result 

in high failure and dropout rates within 

the introductory years of science and 

engineering programs. We invite 

applications for projects that are 

designed to improve student success 

and retention in the first two years with 

actions, including, but not limited to, 

one or more of the following: 

(a) Providing greater exposure to 

science and engineering real-world 

problems in the first two years through 

actions such as the appropriate 

sequencing of courses. 

(b) Introducing recent innovations 

and discoveries in the first two years to 

make science and engineering education 

relevant. The students should 

experience real developments such as 

those led by nanotechnology, cell 

biology, and ICT (Information and 

Communication Technologies). 

(c) Widespread integration of research 

courses into the introductory STEM 

curricula. Expand the use of scientific 

research and engineering design courses 

in the first two years. 

(d) Increasing opportunities for 

student research and design in faculty 

research laboratories. 

(e) Developing new curricula that 

integrate scientific theory with realworld applications in scientific 

problem-solving and engineering 

design, in the context of global 

environmental, energy, and economic 

problems. 

(f) Adopting pedagogy for integrative 

teaching. 

(g) Establishing programs to train 

faculty in evidence-based teaching 

practices, and catalyzing widespread 

adoption of empirically validated 

teaching practices. 

(h) Seeking institutional and 

accreditation support for changes in 

curricular, pedagogical, and graduation 

requirements that are necessary to 

improve the first two years of STEM 

coursework. 

Definitions: The following definitions 

are from the notice of final 

supplemental priorities and definitions 

for discretionary grant programs 

published in the Federal Register on 

December 15, 2010 (75 FR 78486), and 

corrected on May 12, 2011 (76 FR 

27637), and apply to the priorities in 

this notice: 

Carefully matched comparison group 

design means a type of quasiexperimental study (as defined in this 

notice) that attempts to approximate an 

experimental study (as defined in this 

notice). More specifically, it is a design 

in which project participants are 

matched with non-participants based on 

key characteristics that are thought to be 

related to the outcome. These 

characteristics include, but are not 

limited to: 

(1) Prior test scores and other 

measures of academic achievement 

(preferably, the same measures that the 

study will use to evaluate outcomes for 

the two groups); 

(2) Demographic characteristics, such 

as age, disability, gender, English 

proficiency, ethnicity, poverty level, 

parents’ educational attainment, and 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES