Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 22 / Wednesday, February 3, 2010 / Notices 5563 

purpose. The measurable outcomeoriented objective must define an event 

or condition that is external to the 

project and that is of direct importance 

to the intended beneficiaries and/or the 

public. Outcome measures may be long 

term that exceed the grant period. 

Describe how performance toward 

meeting outcomes will be monitored. 

For each project, include a performancemonitoring plan to describe the process 

of collecting and analyzing data to meet 

the outcome-oriented objectives. 

(6) Work Plan. For each project, 

explain briefly the activities that will be 

performed to accomplish the objectives 

of the project. Be clear about who will 

do the work. Include appropriate time 

lines. 

(7) Budget Narrative. Provide in 

sufficient detail information about the 

budget categories listed on SF–424A for 

each project to demonstrate that grant 

funds are being expended on eligible 

grant activities that meet the purpose of 

the program. Indirect costs for this grant 

period should not exceed 10 percent of 

any proposed budget. Provide a 

justification if administrative costs are 

higher than 10 percent. 

(8) Project Oversight. Describe the 

oversight practices that provide 

sufficient knowledge of grant activities 

to ensure proper and efficient 

administration for each project. 

(9) Project Commitment. Describe 

how all grant partners commit to and 

work toward the goals and outcome 

measures of each proposed project(s). 

(10) Multi-state Projects. If the project 

is a multi-state project, describe how the 

states are going to collaborate effectively 

with related projects with one state 

assuming the coordinating role. Indicate 

the percent of the budget covered by 

each state. 

Each State department of agriculture 

that submits an application that is 

reviewed and approved by AMS is to 

receive a base grant of $181,210.00 to 

solely enhance the competitiveness of 

specialty crops. In addition, AMS will 

allocate the remainder of the grant funds 

based on the proportion of the value of 

specialty crop production in the State in 

relation to the national value of 

specialty crop production using the 

latest available (2008 National 

Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) 

cash receipt data for the 50 States and 

the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, 2007 

Census of Agriculture cash receipts for 

Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the 

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana 

Islands, and 2002 Census of Agriculture 

cash receipts for American Samoa) 

specialty crop production data in all 

States whose applications are accepted. 

The amount of the base grant plus 

value of production available to each 

State department of agriculture shall be: 

(1) Alabama ...................... $433,614.25 

(2) Alaska ......................... $197,114.26 

(3) American Samoa ........ $218,019.57 

(4) Arizona ....................... $1,166,388.43 

(5) Arkansas ..................... $270,128.00 

(6) California .................... $17,127,418.72 

(7) Colorado ..................... $768,209.85 

(8) Connecticut ................ $442,964.50 

(9) Delaware ..................... $251,106.99 

(10) District of Columbia .. $181,210.00 

(11) Florida ........................ $4,755,910.19 

(12) Georgia ........................ $1,007,860.65 

(13) Guam .......................... $183,095.84 

(14) Hawaii ........................ $414,690.78 

(15) Idaho ........................... $1,030,188.08 

(16) Illinois ........................ $643,888.15 

(17) Indiana ........................ $397,831.21 

(18) Iowa ............................ $275,455.74 

(19) Kansas ......................... $281,914.52 

(20) Kentucky .................... $272,434.98 

(21) Louisiana .................... $351,899.77 

(22) Maine .......................... $418,723.36 

(23) Maryland .................... $430,505.24 

(24) Massachusetts ............ $500,051.53 

(25) Michigan ..................... $1,404,392.60 

(26) Minnesota ................... $797,130.77 

(27) Mississippi ................. $292,545.23 

(28) Missouri ...................... $341,505.95 

(29) Montana ...................... $291,949.91 

(30) Nebraska ..................... $352,417.68 

(31) Nevada ........................ $230,612.76 

(32) New Hampshire ......... $259,755.08 

(33) New Jersey .................. $834,447.41 

(34) New Mexico ............... $394,228.29 

(35) New York ................... $1,244,624.63 

(36) North Carolina ........... $1,139,042.15 

(37) North Dakota .............. $661,274.92 

(38) Northern Mariana Islands ............................... $182,642.19 

(39) Ohio ............................ $670,646.08 

(40) Oklahoma ................... $368,159.36 

(41) Oregon ........................ $1,750,251.40 

(42) Pennsylvania .............. $1,061,441.53 

(43) Puerto Rico ................. $398,251.58 

(44) Rhode Island .............. $224,083.53 

(45) South Carolina ........... $521,099.28 

(46) South Dakota .............. $208,568.67 

(47) Tennessee ................... $517,731.71 

(48) Texas ........................... $1,785,844.77 

(49) Utah ............................ $308,658.51 

(50) Vermont ...................... $228,276.36 

(51) Virgin Islands ............. $182,394.46 

(52) Virginia ....................... $510,241.75 

(53) Washington ................ $3,712,628.26 

(54) West Virginia ............. $213,306.50 

(55) Wisconsin ................... $1,048,311.07 

(56) Wyoming .................... $205,910.99 

Funds not obligated will be allocated 

pro rata to the remaining States which 

applied during the specified grant 

application period to be solely 

expended on projects previously 

approved in their State plan. AMS will 

notify the States as to the procedures for 

applying for the reallocated funds. 

AMS requires applicants to submit 

SCBGP–FB applications electronically 

through the central Federal grants Web 

site, http://www.grants.gov instead of 

mailing hard copy documents. Original 

signatures are not needed on the SF–424 

and SF–424B when applying through 

http://www.grants.gov and applicants 

are not required to submit any paper 

documents to AMS. Applicants are 

strongly urged to familiarize themselves 

with the Federal grants Web site and 

begin the application process well 

before the application deadline. For 

information on how to apply 

electronically, please consult http:// 

www.grants.gov/applicants/ 

get_registered.jsp. AMS will send an 

email confirmation when applications 

are received by the AMS office. 

SCBGP–FB is listed in the ‘‘Catalog of 

Federal Domestic Assistance’’ under 

number 10.170 and subject agencies 

must adhere to Title VI of the Civil 

Rights Act of 1964, which bars 

discrimination in all federally assisted 

programs. 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1621 note. 

Dated: January 28, 2010. 

Rayne Pegg, 

Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–2218 Filed 1–29–10; 11:15 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Forest Service 

Notice of a Meeting of the Northeast 

Oregon Forests Resource Advisory 

Committee (RAC) 

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Notice of meeting. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the authorities in 

the Federal Advisory Committees Act 

(Pub. L. 92–463), the Northeast Oregon 

Forest Resource Advisory Committee 

(RAC) will meet on February 22–23, 

2010 in La Grande, Oregon. The purpose 

of the meeting is to meet as a Committee 

to discuss selection of Title II projects 

under Public Law 110–343, H.R. 1424, 

the Reauthorization of the Secure Rural 

Schools and community SelfDetermination Act of 2000 (16 U.S.C 

500 note; Pub. L. 106–393), also called 

‘‘Payments to States’’ Act. 

DATES: The meeting will be held on 

February 22 from 9 a.m to 5 p.m., and 

February 23, 2010 from 8 a.m. until 3 

p.m. 

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held in 

the Blue Mountain Conference Center, 

404 12th Street, La Grande, Oregon. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kurt 

Wiedenmann, Designated Federal 

Official, USDA, Wallowa-Whitman 

National Forest, La Grande Ranger 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
5564 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 22 / Wednesday, February 3, 2010 / Notices 

District, 3502 Highway 30, La Grande, 

Oregon 97850; Telephone: (541) 962– 

8582. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This will 

be the first meeting of the Committee 

since reauthorization of Public Law 

106–393. The meeting will focus on 

introducing new Committee members, 

becoming familiar with duties and 

responsibilities, selecting a chairperson, 

reviewing and recommending 2009 and 

2010 project proposals that meet the 

intent of the Act. The meeting is open 

to the public. A public input 

opportunity will be provided, and 

individuals will have the opportunity to 

address the committee at that time. 

Dated: January 27, 2010. 

Jen Fitzpatrick, 

Acting Forest Supervisor. 

[FR Doc. 2010–2277 Filed 2–2–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–11–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Rural Utilities Service 

Notice of a Project Waiver of Section 

1605 (Buy American Requirement) of 

the American Recovery and 

Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) That 

Has Been Granted to the Plymouth 

Village Water & Sewer District, New 

Hampshire 

AGENCY: Rural Utilities Service, U.S. 

Department of Agriculture. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The United States Department 

of Agriculture (USDA) grants a project 

waiver of the Buy American 

Requirements of ARRA Section 1605 

under the authority of Section 

1605(b)(2) [manufactured goods are not 

produced in the United States in 

sufficient and reasonably available 

quantities and of a satisfactory quality] 

to the Plymouth Village Water & Sewer 

District, New Hampshire (‘‘District’’) for 

the purchase of a foreign manufactured 

rotary sludge dewatering press. This is 

a project specific waiver and only 

applies to the use of the specified 

product for the ARRA project being 

proposed. Any other ARRA recipient 

that wishes to use the same product 

must apply for a separate waiver based 

on project specific circumstances. The 

District’s proposed wastewater 

treatment facility improvements will 

include a replacement of the existing 

belt filter press for sludge generated at 

the plant. Based upon information 

submitted by the District and its 

consultants, it was determined that a 

rotary press sludge dewatering unit, 

manufactured by Fournier Industries of 

Quebec, Canada, will meet the District’s 

design and performance specifications. 

The Secretary is making this 

determination based on the review and 

recommendations of the Rural 

Development Buy American 

Coordinator. The District through its 

design engineer has provided sufficient 

documentation to support its request. 

The Undersecretary for Rural 

Development concurred on this decision 

to waive Section 1605 of ARRA. This 

action permits the purchase of a 6 

channel rotary press sludge dewatering 

unit, manufactured by Fournier 

Industries, by the District, as specified 

in its October 7, 2009 waiver request, as 

part of the improvements to the 

wastewater treatment facility. 

DATES: Effective Date: February 3, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Dallas Tonsager, 

Undersecretary, Rural Development, 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 

Independence Avenue, Room 205–W, 

Washington, DC 20250–0107, (202) 720– 

4581. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Benjamin Shuman, Senior 

Environmental Engineer, Engineering 

and Environmental Staff, (202) 720– 

1784, Rural Utilities Service, U. S. 

Department of Agriculture, 1400 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20250–1571. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 

accordance with ARRA Section 1605(c) 

and pursuant to Section 1605(b)(2), 

USDA hereby provides notice that it is 

granting a project specific waiver of the 

Buy American Requirements of ARRA, 

to the Plymouth Village Water & Sewer 

District (‘‘District’’), New Hampshire for 

the purchase of a rotary press sludge 

dewatering unit, manufactured by 

Fournier Industries of Quebec, Canada. 

I. Background 

Section 1605(a) of ARRA requires that 

none of the appropriated funds may be 

used for the construction, alteration, 

maintenance, or repair of a public 

building or public work unless all of the 

iron, steel, and manufactured goods 

used in the project is produced in the 

United States, or unless a waiver is 

provided to the recipient by the head of 

the appropriate department or agency, 

here the Secretary of USDA. A waiver 

may be granted if the Secretary 

determines that (1) Applying these 

requirements would be inconsistent 

with public interest; (2) iron, steel, and 

manufactured goods are not produced in 

the United States in sufficient and 

reasonably available quantities and of a 

satisfactory quality; or (3) inclusion of 

iron, steel, and manufactured goods 

produced in the United States will 

increase the cost of the overall project 

by more than 25 percent. The District 

has requested a waiver from the Buy 

American Requirement for the purchase 

of a foreign made rotary press sludge 

dewatering unit as part of its wastewater 

treatment plant improvement project. 

The purchase of the new rotary sludge 

press is intended to replace the existing 

belt filter press which is approaching 

the end of its useful life. The estimated 

cost of the overall improvements to the 

District’s wastewater treatment plant is 

$5.2 million, of which the cost of the 

foreign made rotary sludge press unit is 

priced at $330,000. In designing the 

wastewater treatment plant, the 

District’s design engineers evaluated the 

various technologies based on the 

following factors: 

• Maintain the current annual average 

dewatered sludge cake solids of 

approximately 25% or higher. 

• Improve environmental working 

conditions in the dewatering area by 

minimizing worker exposure to odorous 

and hazardous gases released from the 

sludge as well as exposure to 

bioaerosols and pathogens. Enclosed 

dewatering equipment will achieve this 

goal. 

• Automatically adjust for variation 

in feed solids concentrations and sludge 

mix ratios to provide consistent and 

optimum cake solids. 

• Allow for unattended, automatic 

operation freeing up operators for other 

needed tasks. 

• Keep the dewatering operation as 

simple as possible while still 

maintaining optimum dewatering 

performance. 

• Allow for some degree of backup 

capacity during periods of equipment 

failure and routine maintenance. 

• Equipment must have a proven 

track record of low annual operation 

and maintenance costs and reliability. 

As part of the review of potentially 

viable sludge dewatering units, four 

technologies were considered by the 

District and their consultants based on 

the above listed criteria: (1) Rotary 

press; (2) screw press; (3) centrifuge; 

and (4) belt filter press. Of the four 

technologies, the District determined 

that a rotary sludge press is the desired 

technology because it ranked the highest 

in terms of meeting the key criteria 

highlighted above. According to data 

submitted by the District’s design 

engineers and reviewed by USDA, the 

foreign made rotary press sludge 

dewatering unit meets the District’s 

technical specifications for design and 

performance of a rotary press sludge 

dewatering unit as part of its wastewater 

treatment plant improvement project. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES