2976 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 8 / Thursday, January 12, 1995 / Notices

Ashland Chemical Co., One Drew Plaza,

Boonton, NJ 07005. The petition

proposes to amend the food additive

regulations in § 173.340 Defoaming

agents (21 CFR 173.340) to provide for

the safe use of polypropylene glycol

with a molecular weight range of 1,200–

3,000 g/mol, as a defoaming agent in

processing beet sugar and yeast.

The agency has determined under 21

CFR 25.24(a)(9) that this action is of a

type that does not individually or

cumulatively have a significant effect on

the human environment. Therefore,

neither an environmental assessment

nor an environmental impact statement

is required.

Dated: January 4, 1995.

Alan M. Rulis,

Acting Director, Office of Premarket

Approval, Center for Food Safety and Applied

Nutrition.

[FR Doc. 95–837 Filed 1–11–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160–01–F

[Docket No. 94F–0451]

The Shepherd Color Co., Filing of Food

Additive Petition

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration,

HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug

Administration (FDA) is announcing

that The Shepherd Color Co. has filed a

petition proposing that the food additive

regulations be amended to provide for

the safe use of copper chromite black

spinel (C.I. Pigment Black 28) as a

colorant for polymers intended for use

in contact with food.

DATES: Written comments on the

petitioner’s environmental assessment

by February 13, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments

to the Dockets Management Branch

(HFA–305), Food and Drug

Administration, rm. 1–23, 12420

Parklawn Dr., Rockville, MD 20857.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vir

D. Anand, Center for Food Safety and

Applied Nutrition (HFS–216), Food and

Drug Administration, 200 C St. SW.,

Washington, DC 20204, 202–418–3081.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the

Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act

(sec. 409(b)(5) (21 U.S.C. 348(b)(5))),

notice is given that a food additive

petition (FAP 5B4446) has been filed by

The Shepherd Color Co., 4539 Dues Dr.,

Cincinnati, OH 45246. The petition

proposes to amend the food additive

regulations in § 178.3297 Colorants for

polymers (21 CFR 178.3297) to provide

for the safe use of copper chromite black

spinel (C.I. Pigment Black 28) as a

colorant for polymers intended for use

in contact with food.

The potential environmental impact

of this action is being reviewed. To

encourage public participation

consistent with regulations promulgated

under the National Environmental

Policy Act (40 CFR 1501.4(b)), the

agency is placing the environmental

assessment submitted with the petition

that is the subject of this notice on

display at the Dockets Management

Branch (address above) for public

review and comment. Interested persons

may, on or before February 13, 1995,

submit to the Dockets Management

Branch (address above) written

comments. Two copies of any comments

are to be submitted, except that

individuals may submit one copy.

Comments are to be identified with the

docket number found in brackets in the

heading of this document. Received

comments may be seen in the office

above between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m.,

Monday through Friday. FDA will also

place on public display any

amendments to, or comments on, the

petitioner’s environmental assessment

without further announcement in the

Federal Register. If, based on its review,

the agency finds that an environmental

impact statement is not required and

this petition results in a regulation, the

notice of availability of the agency’s

finding of no significant impact and the

evidence supporting that finding will be

published with the regulation in the

Federal Register in accordance with 21

CFR 25.40(c). Dated: January 4, 1995.

Alan R. Rulis,

Acting Director, Office of Premarket

Approval, Center for Food Safety and Applied

Nutrition.

[FR Doc. 95–838 Filed 1–11–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160–01–F

Health Resources and Services

Administration

RIN 0905–ZA45

Final Review Criterion and Indicators

for Grants for Family Medicine Training

and Grants for General Internal

Medicine and General Pediatrics

Training

Grants for Family Medicine Training

and Grants for General Internal

Medicine and General Pediatrics

Training are authorized by sections 747

(a) and (b) and 748, title VII of the

Public Health Service Act, as amended

by the Health Professions Education

Extension Amendments of 1992, Pub. L.

102–408, dated October 13, 1992. These

grant programs include:

Grants for Predoctoral Training in

Family Medicine

Grants for Graduate Training in Family

Medicine

Grants for Faculty Development in

Family Medicine

Grants for Establishment of Departments

of Family Medicine

Grants for Residency Training in

General Internal Medicine and

General Pediatrics

Grants for Faculty Development in

General Internal Medicine and

General Pediatrics

A notice was published in the Federal

Register at 59 FR 50423 on October 3,

1994 to review criterion and indicators

for Grants for Family Medicine Training

and Grants for General Internal

Medicine and General Pediatrics

Training. No comments were received

within the 30 day comment period.

Therefore, the review criterion and

indicators remain as proposed.

Review Criteria

The following review criteria were

established in 42 CFR part 57, subparts

Q, R, and FF.

1. The administrative and

management ability of the applicant to

carry out the proposed project in a costeffective manner.

2. The potential of the project to

continue on a self-sustaining basis after

the period of grant support.

3. The degree to which the proposed

project adequately provides for the

project requirements.

In addition, the following review

criterion is finalized for FY 1995:

4. Potential effectiveness of the

proposed project in carrying out the

training purposes of sections 747 or 748

of the PHS Act.

Weighted Indicators

Criterion 1: Potential Effectiveness of

the Proposed Project in Carrying Out the

Training Purposes of Sections 747 and

748 of the PHS Act

Indicator 1—Institutional

Environment—20 points

Proposal describes the actions taken

by the institution (i.e., department,

medical school, or other sponsoring

health care delivery institution) that

demonstrate a high level of support for

and promotion of generalist training and

practice in community-based settings

within underserved urban and rural

communities and populations.

Examples include organizational

mission statements describing support

for training and graduating generalists

in the primary care disciplines,

institutional financial support for such

programs, institutional support for rural
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 8 / Thursday, January 12, 1995 / Notices 2977

practices such as locum tenens, l–800

numbers for consultations, visiting

faculty status for rural practitioners,

complementary institutional and other

resources to support such programs, and

adequate representation of generalist

faculty on key academic committees

such as Admissions, Selection, Tenure,

and Faculty Recruitment.

Indicator 2—Strategic Outcomes—20

points

Proposal describes a strategy for the

institution’s training program that will

lead to or sustain a high level of

graduates entering generalist residencies

and/or practice.

Indicator 3—Generalist Faculty—10

points

Proposal includes strong, clinicallyoriented generalist faculty who practice

in community-based settings that

include underserved populations.

Indicator 4—Promotion of Workforce

Diversity—20 points

Proposal includes a strategy and plan

for recruiting and retaining

underrepresented minority and

disadvantaged faculty, students, trainees

and/or residents. Proposal describes the

current and projected levels of

participation of these underrepresented

groups in the program. Applicants are

expected to reflect the diversity of the

populations within their states.

Indicator 5—Critical Training

Emphasis—10 points

Proposal includes reference to a

curriculum that incorporates Healthy

People 2000 objectives in one or more

of the following content areas: HIV/

AIDS epidemiology, prevention,

diagnosis and treatment; substance

abuse; or clinical preventive services.

Wherever necessary, curriculum is

appropriate to the needs of the patient

population (culturally competent

regarding ethnicity, gender, and sexual

orientation) whether that population is

urban, rural or underserved.

Indicator 6—Interdisciplinary

Training—10 points

Except for Faculty Development

projects, proposal provides for

interdisciplinary clinical training

opportunities, i.e., a training

environment in which students, interns

and/or residents learn to work in teams

including varied health care

professionals and/or primary care

disciplines. The environment is such

that the important contributions by each

member of the health care team are

recognized and utilized in the primary

care setting.

Indicator 7—Clinical Training

Settings—10 points

Except for Faculty Development

projects, proposal provides for clinical

training in community-based settings

within underserved areas or

populations.

Indicator 8—Primary Care

Preceptorship—10 points

For Departments of Family Medicine

and Predoctoral Training Programs

Only: Training includes a primary care

preceptorship that: 1) occurs in the first

or second year and is at least four weeks

in duration; or 2) is a longitudinal

experience of at least five days per

semester in both the first and second

years.

Indicator 9—Third-Year Clerkship—20

points

For Departments of Family Medicine

and Predoctoral Training Programs

Only: Training includes a required

third-year clerkship in family medicine

of at least four-weeks duration.

Indicator 10—Faculty Expertise—30

points

For Faculty Development Programs

Only: Proposal includes adequate

balance in faculty expertise to teach the

proposed curriculum, e.g., teaching

skills, administrative and management

skills, or primary care research.

Indicator 11—Generalism Outcomes/

Continuity of Care—30 points

For General Internal Medicine and/or

General Pediatrics Residency Training

Program Only: Competing continuation

General Internal Medicine and/or

General Pediatrics program

demonstrates a consecutive 3-year track

record of 80% or more graduates

entering primary care careers. IN

ADDITION, by the beginning of the

second year of grant support the

competing continuation OR NEW

General Internal Medicine and/or

General Pediatrics program will provide

ALL PGY–1 residents (primary care and

traditional) entering the Internal

Medicine and/or Pediatrics residency

with continuity of care training

experience comprising a total of 20%

(average) over the 3-year training period,

scheduled in at least 9 months of each

year of training.

Criterion 2: Administration and

Management Ability of the Applicant to

Carry Out the Proposed Project in a

Cost-Effective Manner

Indicator 1—Project Rationale—30

points

Project plan includes a background

statement, a statement of need for the

project, and a specific rationale

justifying the proposed project. Project

plan also describes the links between

this proposed project and an effective

larger institutional program, i.e., the

department, division, residency, etc.

This section of the project plan will

define the larger purposes of the project,

i.e., in what way the project will cause

an improvement or expansion in the

capability of the larger educational

institution or program to deliver quality

primary care training.

For competing continuation

proposals, a progress report is provided.

At a minimum, the report includes a

summary of the funded objectives and

the accomplishments made during the

project period. Progress report includes

evaluation data related to each of the

project objectives. For applicants who

are not currently funded, but who have

received funding within the last four

years, a discussion is included in the

application describing the previously

funded objectives, accomplishments

and evaluation data relative to those

objectives.

Indicator 2—Project Objectives—40

points

Project plan contains a detailed

description of the project’s objectives

with measurement indicators for each

objective. The plan also includes a

description of the methods that will be

used to implement the project, e.g.,

educational strategy, timetable and a

resource plan that outlines the faculty,

staff, facilities and equipment that will

be used, including identification of

those resources that already exist or that

will be made available by the

institution.

Indicator 3—Budget Justification—30

points

Project plan indicates the degree to

which the proposed objectives relate to

the budget narrative and justifies the

budget items requested.

Indicator 4—Evaluation Plan—10 points

Project plan includes an evaluation

strategy for the proposed project to

determine achievements in relation to

project objectives.
2978 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 8 / Thursday, January 12, 1995 / Notices

Indicator 5—Anticipated Problems—10

points

Project plan defines the problems

anticipated in implementing the project

and the proposed approaches to

resolving such problems as may arise.

Indicator 6—Institutional

Collaboration—15 points

Project plan includes documentation

of the support of individuals or

organizations who will collaborate in

implementation of this proposed

project. Letters of support for the project

from the institution, department,

faculty, etc., are included. For Faculty

Development projects, letters from

potential/actual trainees are included.

Indicator 7—Trainee Grid—10 points

Except for Departments of Family

Medicine, project plan includes a

‘‘trainee grid’’ that defines the type of

individuals being trained, how many

will be trained, and when they will be

trained.

For General Internal Medicine and

General Pediatrics Residencies, the grid

should also reflect actual and projected

numbers of primary care and traditional

residents.

Criterion 3: Economic Viability—The

Potential of the Project to Continue on

a Self-Sustaining Basis After the Period

of the Project Grant

Indicator 1—Continuation Support—10

points

Proposed projects demonstrate how

their support will be continued after

cessation of Federal funding. If other

projects have been funded under this

grant program within the past five years,

a financial report discusses how

terminated Federal funds have been

replaced.

Indicator 2—Non-Federal Support—10

points

Financial and in-kind support is or

will be provided by state or local

government, institution, medical school,

department, patient fees, or other

private funding sources to supplement

the Federal grant.

Criterion 4: Degree to Which the

Proposed Project Adequately Provides

for the Project Requirements

(These indicators (project

requirements) have been established in

42 CFR part 57, subparts Q, R, and FF

and are summarized below.)

Establishing Departments of Family

Medicine

Indicator 1—Project Director—10 Points

Indicator 2—Administrative

Autonomy—15 points

Indicator 3—Control Over Residency

Program—10 points

Indicator 4—Evaluation Plans—10

points

Indicator 5—Family Medicine

Instruction—10 points

Indicator 6—Full-Time Faculty—10

points

Indicator 7—Academic Status—10

points

Family Medicine Residencies

Indicator 1—Accreditation Status—40

points

Proposal includes a letter of

accreditation from the ACGME/RRC or a

letter of approval from the AOA

verifying that the residency meets all

requirements. All such projects are

considered to have satisfied the Project

Requirements. To the extent that

problems are noted by the accrediting

body, the project plan addresses the

problems and has a plausible plan for

their correction. New programs which

have not yet been accredited must meet

the project requirements specified in

regulations at 42 CFR 57.1604.

Family Medicine Faculty Development

Indicator 1—Project Director—10 points

Indicator 2—Administrative &

Organizational Plan—10 points

Indicator 3—Evaluation Plans—10

points

Indicator 4—Curriculum—25 points

Indicator 5—Eligible Trainees—10

points

Indicator 6—Number of Trainees—0

points

Indicator 7—Length of Training—0

points

Indicator 8—Trainee Support—0 points

Family Medicine Predoctoral Training

Indicator 1—Project Director—10 points

Indicator 2—Administrative &

Organizational Plan—10 points

Indicator 3—Evaluation Plans—10

points

Indicator 4—Ambulatory Care Training

Settings—20 points

Indicator 5—Curriculum—10 points

Indicator 6—Sponsoring Unit—10

points

Indicator 7—Institutional Strategy—10

points

General Internal Medicine and General

Pediatrics Residencies

Indicator 1—Project Director—10 points

Indicator 2—Administrative &

Organizational Plan—10 points

Indicator 3—Curriculum Development

and Evaluation Coordinator—10

points

Indicator 4—Faculty and Training

Personnel—10 points

Indicator 5—Behavioral Science

Faculty—10 points

Indicator 6—Resident Recruitment and

Selection—10 points

Indicator 7—Requirement for Stipend

Support—0 points

Indicator 8—Number and Distribution

of Residents—10 points

Indicator 9—Ambulatory Care Training

Setting—10 points

Indicator 10—Continuity of Care

Experience—0 points

Indicator 11—Other Ambulatory Patient

Care Experiences—10 points

Indicator 12—Curriculum Content and

Evaluation of Educational Offerings—

20 points

Indicator 13—Evaluation of Residents—

10 points

General Internal Medicine and General

Pediatrics Faculty Development

Indicator 1—Project Director—10 points

Indicator 2—Administrative &

Organizational Plan—10 points

Indicator 3—Curriculum—25 points

Indicator 4—Evaluation Plans—10

points

Indicator 5—Eligible Trainees—10

points

Indicator 6—Eligibility for Trainee

Stipend Support—0 points

Indicator 7—Length of Training for

Stipend Support—0 points

If additional information is needed,

please contact: Enrique Fernandez,

M.D., Division of Medicine, Bureau of

Health Professions, Health Resources

and Services Administration, Parklawn

Building, Room 9A–20, 5600 Fishers

Lane, Rockville, Maryland 20857,

Telephone: (301) 443–1467, FAX: (301)

443–8890.

Dated: January 5, 1995.

Ciro V. Sumaya,

Administrator.

[FR Doc. 95–696 Filed 1–11–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160–15–P

Health Resources and Services

Administration

Final Project Requirements and

Review Criteria for Cooperative

Agreements for the National AIDS

Education and Training Centers

Program for FY 1995

The Health Resources and Services

Administration (HRSA) announces the

final project requirements and review

criteria for Cooperative Agreements for

the National AIDS Education and

Training Centers (AETCs) Program for

FY 1995 authorized under section

776(a), title VII of the Public Health

Service (PHS) Act, as amended by the

Health Professions Education Extension

Amendments of 1992, Public Law 102–

408, dated October 13, 1992.