Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 115 / Thursday, June 14, 2001 / Notices 32407

significantly affected. Any reduction in

confidence that a standby system might

fail to perform its safety function due to

a missed surveillance is small and

would not, in the absence of other

unrelated failures, lead to an increase in

consequences beyond those estimated

by existing analyses. The addition of a

requirement to assess and manage the

risk introduced by the missed

surveillance will further minimize

possible concerns. Therefore, this

change does not involve a significant

increase in the probability or

consequences of an accident previously

evaluated.

Criterion 2—The Proposed Change Does

Not Create the Possibility of a New or

Different Kind of Accident From Any

Previously Evaluated

The proposed change does not

involve a physical alteration of the plant

(no new or different type of equipment

will be installed) or a change in the

methods governing normal plant

operation. A missed surveillance will

not, in and of itself, introduce new

failure modes or effects and any

increased chance that a standby system

might fail to perform its safety function

due to a missed surveillance would not,

in the absence of other unrelated

failures, lead to an accident beyond

those previously evaluated. The

addition of a requirement to assess and

manage the risk introduced by the

missed surveillance will further

minimize possible concerns. Thus, this

change does not create the possibility of

a new or different kind of accident from

any accident previously evaluated.

Criterion 3—The Proposed Change Does

Not Involve a Significant Reduction in

the Margin of Safety

The extended time allowed to perform

a missed surveillance does not result in

a significant reduction in the margin of

safety. As supported by the historical

data, the likely outcome of any

surveillance is verification that the LCO

is met. Failure to perform a surveillance

within the prescribed frequency does

not cause equipment to become

inoperable. The only effect of the

additional time allowed to perform a

missed surveillance on the margin of

safety is the extension of the time until

inoperable equipment is discovered to

be inoperable by the missed

surveillance. However, given the rare

occurrence of inoperable equipment,

and the rare occurrence of a missed

surveillance, a missed surveillance on

inoperable equipment would be very

unlikely. This must be balanced against

the real risk of manipulating the plant

equipment or condition to perform the

missed surveillance. In addition,

parallel trains and alternate equipment

are typically available to perform the

safety function of the equipment not

tested. Thus, there is confidence that the

equipment can perform its assumed

safety function.

Therefore, this change does not

involve a significant reduction in a

margin of safety.

Based upon the reasoning presented

above and the previous discussion of

the amendment request, the requested

change does not involve a significant

hazards consideration.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day

of June 2001.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Robert L. Dennig,

Acting Chief, Technical Specification Branch,

Division of Regulatory Improvement

Programs, Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation.

[FR Doc. 01–14978 Filed 6–13–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD

Sunshine Act Meeting

Notice is hereby given that the

Railroad Retirement Board will hold a

meeting on June 20, 2001, 9:00 a.m., at

the Board’s meeting room on the 8th

floor of its headquarters building, 844

North Rush Street, Chicago, Illinois,

60611. The agenda for this meeting

follows:

Portion open to the public:

(1) OMB Bulletin No. 01–07,

Workforce Planning &

Restructuring.

Portion closed to the public:

(A) Reassignment of Ms. Ruby Bland.

The person to contact for more

information is Beatrice Ezerski,

Secretary to the Board, Phone No. 312–

751–4920.

Dated: June 11, 2001.

Beatrice Ezerski,

Secretary to the Board.

[FR Doc. 01–15104 Filed 6–12–01; 10:07 am]

BILLING CODE 7905–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 3698]

Bureau of Educational and Cultural

Affairs Request for Grant Proposals:

Edmund S. Muskie/FREEDOM Support

Act Graduate Fellowship Program

Summary

Subject to the availability of funds,

the Office of Academic Exchange

Programs of the Bureau of Educational

and Cultural Affairs announces an open

competition for an assistance award.

Public and private non-profit

organizations meeting the provisions

described in IRS regulation 26 CFR

1.501(c) may submit proposals to

administer the selection, placement,

monitoring, evaluation, follow-on, and

alumni activities for the FY 2002

Edmund S. Muskie/FREEDOM Support

Act Graduate Fellowship Program.

Proposals should include provisions for

the recruitment of FY 2003 fellows.

The Edmund S. Muskie/FREEDOM

Support Act Graduate Fellowship

Program (herein referred to as the

Muskie/FSA Program) selects

outstanding citizens from the New

Independent States (NIS) to receive

fellowships for Master’s level study in

the United States in the fields of

business administration, economics,

education, environmental management,

international affairs, law, library and

information science, journalism/mass

communications, public administration,

public health, and public policy.

Fellowships are granted to qualified

individuals who are citizens of

Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia,

Kazakstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, the

Russian Federation, Tajikistan,

Turkmenistan, Ukraine, or Uzbekistan.

Muskie/FSA Program fellows will be

enrolled in graduate degree, certificate,

and non-degree programs lasting one to

two academic years, with the majority

enrolled in two-year degree-granting

programs. It is estimated that

approximately 330 fellows will receive

fellowships under the FY 2002 program.

Interested organizations should read the

entire Federal Register announcement

for all information prior to preparing

proposals.

Organizations with less than four

years of experience in conducting

international exchange programs are not

eligible for this competition.

Program Information

Overview: The Muskie/FSA Program

is designed to foster democratization

and the transition to market economies

in the NIS through intensive academic

study and professional training. The

academic component of the program

begins in the fall semester of the year

following the award (in this case 2002).

Fellows may participate in a nine,

twelve, eighteen, or twenty-four month

academic program. Fellows also take

part in an eight to twelve week

internship during the summer following

the first academic year, with an option

for a second internship following the

second year of study. Fellows must

return to their home countries at the

32408 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 115 / Thursday, June 14, 2001 / Notices

conclusion of their program. The

Muskie/FSA Program is not intended as

a precursor to doctoral studies,

extended professional training, or

employment in the United States. At the

end of their designated academic and/or

internship programs, fellows are

required to immediately return to their

home countries.

ECA will consider awarding one or

more grants for this program. Should

more than one organization be selected

to administer the Muskie/FSA Program,

ECA will decide on the distribution of

fellows between grantee organizations.

Should an applicant organization

wish to work with other organizations

in the implementation of this program,

ECA prefers that a sub-grant agreement

be developed. However, ECA will

entertain separately submitted proposals

from two or more organizations for joint

program management, as long as the

proposals demonstrate a value-added

relationship and clearly delineate

responsibilities. Program

responsibilities should not be

duplicated and the arrangement should

not produce prohibitive administrative

expenses.

The Muskie/FSA Program must

conform to ECA requirements and

guidelines outlined in the Solicitation

Package. ECA programs are subject to

the availability of funds and must

comply with J–1 Visa regulations. Please

refer to the Solicitation Package for

further information.

Applicant organizations must

demonstrate the ability to administer all

aspects of the Muskie/FSA Program—

selection, university placements,

orientation, monitoring and support of

FY 2002 fellows including all logistics,

financial management, evaluation,

follow-on, and alumni tracking and

programming, as well as advertisement

for, and recruitment of, FY 2003

applicants in the NIS. Applicant

organizations must demonstrate the

ability to recruit and select a diverse

pool of candidates from various

geographic regions in the NIS.

Organizations will take the lead in the

recruitment and selection of appropriate

host institutions from throughout the

United States for pre-academic, English

as a Foreign Language, and academic

programs. Organizations will serve as

the principal liaison with Muskie/FSA

Program host institutions for ECA.

Applicant organizations should

demonstrate the ability to work with

private sector organizations in the

United States and the NIS to facilitate

fellows’ professional development and

post-program re-entry. Further details

on specific program responsibilities can

be found in the Project Objectives,

Goals, and Implementation (POGI)

Statement, which is part of the formal

solicitation package available from ECA.

Guidelines: The award to the grantee

organization will begin on or about

October 1, 2001 and will be

approximately two years in duration.

Recruitment and initial selection

activities for FY 2002 fellows will be

performed by the current grantee

organizations. The level of funding for

FY 2002 is uncertain, but is anticipated

to be approximately $20,460,000. Based

on this figure, applicant organizations

should submit a budget to fund no fewer

than 330 fellows. The final number of

fellowships per country will be

announced following the grant award;

however, for planning purposes

organizations should assume the

following distribution of fellows by

country: Armenia 40, Azerbaijan 28,

Belarus 9, Georgia 24, Kazakstan 15,

Kyrgyzstan 11, Moldova 8, Russian

Federation 67, Tajikistan 3,

Turkmenistan 7, Ukraine 101,

Uzbekistan 17. Additionally, applicant

organizations should assume the

following number of fellows by field of

study: Business Administration 45,

Economics 30, Education 30,

Environmental Management 30,

International Affairs 35, Journalism/

Mass Communications 20, Law 30,

Library and Information Science 10,

Public Administration 40, Public Health

30, and Public Policy 30.

Applicant organizations are

encouraged, through cost sharing and

other methods, to provide for as many

fellowships as possible above and

beyond the minimum numbers supplied

by ECA.

Budget Guidelines: ECA grant

guidelines limit organizations with less

than four years experience conducting

international exchanges to $60,000 in

Bureau grant support. Because of the

scope and complexity of this program,

organizations with less than four years

experience in conducting international

exchanges are not eligible to apply

under this competition.

ECA encourages applicant

organizations to provide maximum

levels of cost sharing and funding from

private sources in support of its

programs. Applicant organizations must

submit a comprehensive line item

budget to include a summary budget as

well as breakdowns reflecting both

administrative and program budgets.

Applicants may provide separate subbudgets for each program component,

phase, location, or activity to provide

clarification. A comprehensive narrative

must accompany the budget, clearly

explaining all proposed costs (staff

salaries and time on task must be

supported by appropriate

documentation and certified as true and

accurate representations of actual costs

and percentage of task).

Allowable costs for the program

include the following:

(1) Program Expenses

(2) Domestic Administration

(3) Overseas Administration

Please refer to the Solicitation

Package for complete budget guidelines

and formatting instructions.

Announcement Title and Number: All

correspondence with ECA concerning

this RFGP should reference the above

title and number ECA/A/E/EUR–02–02.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT: The

Office of Academic Exchange Programs,

ECA/A/E/EUR, Room 246, U.S.

Department of State, SA–44, 301 4th

Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547,

telephone: (202) 619–5429, fax: (202)

260–7985, e-mail: nsargent@pd.state.gov

to request a Solicitation Package. The

Solicitation Package contains detailed

award criteria, required application

forms, specific budget instructions, and

standard guidelines for proposal

preparation. Please specify ECA

Program Officer Nadine Asef-Sargent on

all inquiries and correspondence.

Please read the complete Federal

Register announcement before sending

inquiries or submitting proposals. Once

the RFGP deadline has passed, ECA staff

may not discuss this competition with

applicants until the proposal review

process has been completed.

To Download a Solicitation Package

Via Internet

The entire Solicitation Package may

be downloaded from ECA’s website at

http://exchanges.state.gov/education/

RFGPs. Please read all information

before downloading.

Deadline for Proposals: All proposal

copies must be received at the Bureau

of Educational and Cultural Affairs by 5

p.m. Washington, DC time, Thursday,

August 9, 2001. Faxed documents will

not be accepted at any time. Documents

postmarked the due date but received

on a later date will not be accepted.

Each applicant must ensure that the

proposals are received by the above

deadline.

Applicants must follow all

instructions in the Solicitation Package.

The original and ten (10) copies of the

application should be sent to: U.S.

Department of State, SA–44, Bureau of

Educational and Cultural Affairs, Ref.:

ECA/A/E/EUR–02–02, Program

Management, ECA/EX/PM, Room 534,

301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC

20547.

Applicants must also submit the

‘‘Executive Summary’’ and ‘‘Proposal

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 115 / Thursday, June 14, 2001 / Notices 32409

Narrative’’ sections of the proposal on a

3.5′′ diskette, formatted for DOS. These

documents must be provided in ASCII

text (DOS) format with a maximum line

length of 65 characters. ECA will

transmit these files electronically to

Public Affairs Sections at U.S.

Embassies in the NIS for review, with

the goal of reducing the time it takes to

obtain embassy comments for ECA’s

grants review process.

Diversity, Freedom and Democracy

Guidelines: Pursuant to ECA’s

authorizing legislation, programs must

maintain a non-political character and

should be balanced and representative

of the diversity of American political,

social, and cultural life. ‘‘Diversity’’

should be interpreted in the broadest

sense and encompass differences

including, but not limited to, ethnicity,

race, gender, religion, geographic

location, socio-economic status, and

physical challenges. Applicants are

strongly encouraged to adhere to the

advancement of this principle both in

program administration and in program

content. Please refer to the review

criteria under the ‘‘Support for

Diversity’’ section for specific

suggestions on incorporating diversity

into the total proposal. Public Law 104–

319 provides that ‘‘in carrying out

programs of educational and cultural

exchange in countries whose people do

not fully enjoy freedom and

democracy,’’ ECA ‘‘shall take

appropriate steps to provide

opportunities for participation in such

programs to human rights and

democracy leaders of such countries.’’

Public Law 106–113 requires that the

governments of the countries described

above do not have inappropriate

influence in the selection process.

Proposals should reflect advancement of

these goals, to the full extent deemed

feasible.

Review Process: ECA will

acknowledge receipt of all proposals

and will review them for technical

eligibility. Proposals will be deemed

ineligible if they do not fully adhere to

the guidelines stated herein and in the

Solicitation Package. The Program

Office, as well as the Public Affairs

Sections overseas, where appropriate,

will review all eligible proposals.

Eligible proposals will be subject to

compliance with Federal and ECA

regulations and guidelines and

forwarded to ECA grant panels for

advisory review. Proposals may also be

reviewed by the Office of the Legal

Adviser or by other Department

elements. Final funding decisions are at

the discretion of the Department of

State’s Acting Assistant Secretary for

Educational and Cultural Affairs. Final

technical authority for assistance

awards (grants or cooperative

agreements) resides with an ECA Grants

Officer.

Review Criteria: Technically eligible

applications will be competitively

reviewed according to the criteria stated

below. These criteria are not rank

ordered and all carry equal weight in

the proposal evaluation:

1. Program Development: The

proposal should exhibit originality,

substance, precision, and relevance to

ECA’s mission. Objectives should be

reasonable, feasible, and flexible. A

detailed and relevant work plan should

demonstrate substantive understanding

of program goals and logistical capacity.

2. Institutional Capacity: Proposed

personnel and institutional resources

should be adequate and appropriate to

achieve the program’s goals. The

proposal should demonstrate an

institutional record of successful

exchange programs, including

responsible fiscal management and full

compliance with all reporting

requirements for past ECA grants. ECA

will consider the past performance of

prior recipients and the demonstrated

potential of new applicants.

3. Multiplier Effect: The program

should strengthen long-term mutual

understanding, including maximum

sharing of information and

establishment of long-term institutional

and individual linkages.

4. Support of Diversity: The proposal

should demonstrate the applicant

organization’s commitment to

promoting the awareness and

understanding of diversity through

participant recruitment efforts, the

selection of U.S. host institutions, and

other measures.

5. Follow-on and Alumni Activities:

The proposal should provide a plan for

continued activity which ensures that

ECA-supported programs are not

isolated events, but have meaning and

scope beyond the time the actual

exchange took place.

6. Project Evaluation: The proposal

should include plans to evaluate the

program’s success, both during and after

the program.

7. Cost-effectiveness: The overhead

and administrative components of the

proposal, including salaries and

honoraria, should be kept as low as

possible. All other items should be

necessary and appropriate.

8. Cost-sharing: The proposal should

maximize cost sharing through private

sector support as well as institutional

direct funding contributions.

Authority: Overall grant making

authority for this program is contained

in the Mutual Educational and Cultural

Exchange Act of 1961, Public Law 87–

256, as amended, also known as the

Fulbright-Hays Act. The purpose of the

Act is ‘‘to enable the Government of the

United States to increase mutual

understanding between the people of

the United States and the people of

other countries * * *; to strengthen the

ties which unite us with other nations

by demonstrating the educational and

cultural interests, developments, and

achievements of the people of the

United States and other nations * * *

and thus to assist in the development of

friendly, sympathetic and peaceful

relations between the United States and

the other countries of the world.’’ The

funding authority for the program above

is provided principally through

FREEDOM Support Act legislation.

Notice: The terms and conditions

published in this RFGP are binding and

may not be modified by any ECA

representative. Explanatory information

provided by ECA that contradicts

published language will not be binding.

Issuance of the RFGP does not

constitute an award commitment on the

part of the Government. ECA reserves

the right to reduce, revise, or increase

proposal budgets in accordance with the

needs of the program and the

availability of funds. Awards made will

be subject to periodic reporting and

evaluation requirements.

Notification

Final awards cannot be made until

funds have been appropriated by

Congress, allocated, and committed

through internal ECA procedures.

Dated: June 5, 2001.

Helena Kane Finn,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Educational

and Cultural Affairs, U.S. Department of

State.

[FR Doc. 01–15052 Filed 6–13–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710–05–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Aviation Rulemaking Advisory

Committee Meeting on Transport

Airplane and Engine Issues

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

SUMMARY: This notice announces a

public meeting of the FAA’s Aviation

Rulemaking Advisory Committee

(ARAC) to discuss transport airplane

and engine (TAE) issues.

DATES: The meeting is scheduled for

June 26–27, 2001, beginning at 8:30 a.m.