Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 26 / Tuesday, February 9, 2010 / Notices 6355 

provided to a delivery service after 

11:59 p.m. EST February 16, 2010 will 

not be considered for funding. 

Electronic applications must be 

submitted through www.grants.gov by 

11:59 p.m. EST on February 16, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: NOAA Restoration Center 

(F/HC3) NOAA Fisheries, Office of 

Habitat Conservation, 1315 East West 

Highway, Rm. 14730, Silver Spring, MD 

20910 Attn: Great Lakes 

HabitatRestoration Project Applications. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

further information contact Jenni 

Wallace at (301) 713—0174 ext. 183, or 

by e-mail at Jenni.Wallace@noaa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

January 19, 2010, the NOAA Great Lakes 

Habitat Restoration Program Project 

Grants announced its solicitation for 

applications under the Great Lakes 

Restoration Initiative in the NOAA 

Notice of Availability of Grant Funds for 

Fiscal Year 2010, published in the 

Federal Register (75 FR 3101). That 

announcement listed an incorrect 

deadline for postmarking or receipt by 

delivery service of hard copy mailings. 

The correct deadline for postmarking or 

receipt by delivery service of a hard 

copy application is 11:59 p.m. EST on 

February 16, 2010. The deadline for 

electronic submissions remains 

unchanged and continues to be 11:59 

p.m. EST on February 16, 2010. 

All other information and 

requirements as published in the 

January 19, 2010 notice remain 

unchanged. 

Intergovernmental review: 

Applications submitted by state and 

local governments are subject to the 

provisions of Executive Order 12372, 

‘‘Intergovernmental Review of Federal 

Programs.’’ Any applicant submitting an 

application for funding is required to 

complete item 16 on SF–424 regarding 

clearance by the State Single Point of 

Contact (SPOC) established as a result of 

EO 12372. To find out and comply with 

a State’s process under EO 12372, the 

names, addresses and phone numbers of 

participating SPOCs are listed in the 

Office of Management and Budget’s 

home page at: http:// 

www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants/ 

spoc.html 

Limitation of liability: In no event will 

NOAA or the Department of Commerce 

be responsible for proposal preparation 

costs if these programs fail to receive 

funding or are cancelled because of 

other agency priorities. Publication of 

this announcement does not oblige 

NOAA to award any specific project or 

to obligate any available funds. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA): NOAA must analyze the 

potential environmental impacts, as 

required by the National Environmental 

Policy Act (NEPA), for applicant 

projects or proposals which are seeking 

NOAA federal funding opportunities. 

Detailed information on NOAA 

compliance with NEPA can be found at 

the following NOAA NEPA website: 

http://www.nepa.noaa.gov/, including 

our NOAA Administrative Order 216–6 

for NEPA, http://www.nepa.noaa.gov/ 

NAO216l6lTOC.pdf, and the Council 

on Environmental Quality 

implementation regulations, http:// 

ceq.eh.doe.gov/nepa/regs/ceq/ 

toclceq.htm. Consequently, as part of 

an applicant’s package, and under their 

description of their program activities, 

applicants are required to provide 

detailed information on the activities to 

be conducted, locations, sites, species 

and habitat to be affected, possible 

construction activities, and any 

environmental concerns that may exist 

(e.g., the use and disposal of hazardous 

or toxic chemicals, introduction of nonindigenous species, impacts to 

endangered and threatened species, 

aquaculture projects, and impacts to 

coral reef systems). In addition to 

providing specific information that will 

serve as the basis for any required 

impact analyses, applicants may also be 

requested to assist NOAA in drafting of 

an environmental assessment, if NOAA 

determines an assessment is required. 

Applicants will also be required to 

cooperate with NOAA in identifying 

feasible measures to reduce or avoid any 

identified adverse environmental 

impacts of their proposal. The failure to 

do so shall be grounds for not selecting 

an application. In some cases if 

additional information is required after 

an application is selected, funds can be 

withheld by the Grants Officer under a 

special award condition requiring the 

recipient to submit additional 

environmental compliance information 

sufficient to enable NOAA to make an 

assessment on any impacts that a project 

may have on the environment. 

The Department of Commerce preaward notification requirements for 

grants and cooperative agreements: The 

Department of Commerce Pre-Award 

Notification Requirements for Grants 

and Cooperative Agreements contained 

in the Federal Register notice of 

February 11, 2008 (73 FR 7696), are 

applicable to this solicitation. 

Paperwork Reduction Act: This 

document contains collection-ofinformation requirements subject to the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). The 

use of Standard Forms 424, 424A, 424B, 

and SF–LLL and CD–346 has been 

approved by the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) under the respective 

control numbers 0348–0043, 0348–0044, 

0348–0040, 0348–0046, and 0605–0001. 

Notwithstanding any other provision of 

law, no person is required to, nor shall 

a person be subject to a penalty for 

failure to comply with, a collection of 

information subject to the requirements 

of the PRA unless that collection of 

information displays a currently valid 

OMB control number. 

Executive Order 12866: This notice 

has been 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. 

Administrative Procedure Act/ 

Regulatory Flexibility Act: Prior notice 

and an opportunity for public comment 

are not required by the Administrative 

Procedure Act or any other law for rules 

concerning public property, loans, 

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

553(a)(2)). Because notice and 

opportunity for comment are not 

required pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553 or any 

other law, the analytical requirements 

for the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.) are inapplicable. 

Therefore, a regulatory flexibility 

analysis has not been prepared. 

Dated: February 4, 2010. 

Tammy L. Journet, 

Deputy Director, Acquisition and Grants 

Office, Contracting Officer, National Oceanic 

and Atmospheric Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2010–2805 Filed 2–8–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–12–S 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Institute of Standards and 

Technology 

[Docket Number: 100114022–0024–01] 

Manufacturing Extension Partnership 

(MEP) Availability of Funds for Three 

Regions Including the State of Arizona, 

Chicago Region of the State of Illinois 

and the Identified Counties in Central 

Pennsylvania 

AGENCY: National Institute of Standards 

and Technology, Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The National Institute of 

Standards and Technology invites 

proposals from qualified organizations 

for funding projects that provide 

manufacturing extension services to 

primarily small- and medium-sized 

manufacturers in the United States. 

These projects will establish 

manufacturing extension centers under 


Cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
6356 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 26 / Tuesday, February 9, 2010 / Notices 

the Manufacturing Extension 

Partnership Program. Proposals are 

invited for the establishment or 

continuation of manufacturing 

extension service within three discrete 

geographic areas located in Illinois, 

Arizona and Central Pennsylvania. The 

three areas are detailed further in the 

section entitled SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION. 

DATES: All applications must be 

received or postmarked no later than 5 

p.m. Eastern Time on April 12, 2010. 

Late proposals will not be reviewed. 

ADDRESSES: Hard copy submissions 

should be sent to: National Institute of 

Standards and Technology, 

Manufacturing Extension Partnership, 

c/o Diane Henderson, 100 Bureau Drive, 

Stop 4800, Gaithersburg, MD 20899– 

4800. Electronic submissions should be 

uploaded to http://www.Grants.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A 

paper copy of the Federal Register 

Notice (FRN) may be obtained by calling 

(301) 975–6328. Administrative, budget, 

cost-sharing, and eligibility questions 

should be addressed to Diane 

Henderson at Tel: (301) 975–5105; Email: diane.henderson@nist.gov; Fax: 

(301) 963–6556. Project evaluation 

criteria and other programmatic 

questions should be addressed to Alex 

Folk at Tel: (301) 975–8089; E-mail: 

alex.folk@nist.gov; Fax: (301) 963–6556. 

Grants Administration questions should 

be addressed to: Grants and Agreements 

Management Division; National Institute 

of Standards and Technology; 100 

Bureau Drive, Stop 1650; Gaithersburg, 

MD 20899–1650; Tel: (301) 975–6328. 

For assistance with using Grants.gov 

contact support@grants.gov or call 800– 

518–4726. All questions and responses 

will be posted on the MEP Web site, 

http://www.mep.nist.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Electronic 

access: Applicants are strongly 

encouraged to read the Federal Funding 

Opportunity (FFO) announcement 

available at http://www.Grants.gov for 

complete information about this 

program, all program requirements, and 

instructions for applying by paper or 

electronically. 

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

in 15 CFR Part 290. 

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 

Name and Number: Measurement and 

Engineering Research and Standards— 

11.611. 

Program Description: The National 

Institute of Standards and Technology 

invites proposals from qualified 

organizations for funding projects that 

provide manufacturing extension 

services to primarily small- and 

medium-sized manufacturers in the 

United States. These projects will 

establish manufacturing extension 

centers under the Manufacturing 

Extension Partnership Program. 

Proposals are invited for the 

establishment or expansion of 

manufacturing extension service within 

three discrete geographic areas located 

in Illinois, Arizona and Central 

Pennsylvania. The three areas are 

further detailed below: 

• Chicago Region of Illinois—The 

region includes: McHenry, Kane, 

DuPage, Cooke, Chicago, Will and Lake 

counties. 

• Arizona—The region includes the 

entire state of Arizona. 

• Central Pennsylvania—The region 

includes: Bedford, Blair, Centre, 

Clinton, Huntingdon, Juniata, 

Lycoming, Mifflin, Montour, 

Northumberland, Snyder, and Union 

counties. 

The objective of the projects funded 

under this program is to provide 

manufacturing extension services to 

primarily small- and medium-sized 

manufacturers in the United States. 

These services are provided through the 

coordinated efforts of a regionally-based 

manufacturing extension center and 

local technology resources. The 

management and operational structure 

of the manufacturing extension center is 

not prescribed, but should be based 

upon the characteristics of the 

manufacturers in the regional and 

locally available resources with 

demonstrated experience working with 

manufacturers. The proposal should 

include plans for integration into the 

MEP national system and linkages to 

appropriate national resources. It is not 

the intent of this program that the 

centers perform research and 

development. Please see full program 

description in the FFO announcement. 

Funding Availability: NIST 

anticipates that up to $3,875,000 in 

cooperative agreements will be available 

to support manufacturing extension 

centers under this announcement. The 

funding level for individual awards is 

not prescribed. NIST anticipates 

funding 3 awards at the level of up to 

$1,000,000 for the state of Arizona, up 

to $2,500,000 for the Chicago region of 

Illinois and up to $375,000 for the 

Central Pennsylvania region. The 

projects awarded under this program 

will have a budget and performance 

period of one year. Each project may be 

renewed on an annual basis subject to 

the review requirements described in 15 

CFR 290.8. Renewal of each award shall 

be at the sole discretion of NIST and 

shall be based upon satisfactory 

performance, priority of the need for the 

service, existing legislative authority, 

and availability of funds. Projects are 

expected to start within 30 days of 

award notice. 

Cost Share Requirements: A nonfederal cost share contribution from the 

applicant is required. At a minimum, 

the applicant must provide per the 

following table cost share towards the 

total capital, operating and maintenance 

costs for the center. 

Year of center operation Maximum 

NIST share 

1–3 ............................................ 1⁄2

4 ................................................ 2⁄5

5 and beyond ............................ 1⁄3

The applicant’s share of the center 

expenses may include cash and in-kind 

contributions. However, at least 50% of 

the applicant’s total cost share (cash 

plus in-kind) must be in cash. 

Applicants are encouraged to propose 

more than the minimum cost share. The 

source and detailed rationale of the cost 

share, both cash and in-kind, must be 

documented in the budget submitted 

with the proposal and will be 

considered as part of the evaluation 

review. 

Eligibility: Each Award recipient must 

be a U.S.-based not-for-profit institution 

or organization. For the purpose of this 

solicitation, not-for-profit organizations 

include universities and state and local 

governments. Eligible applicants may be 

consortia of non-profit institutions. 

Existing and previous centers and 

partners are eligible as well as 

organizations without prior experience 

in the MEP program. 

Application Requirements: 

Applications must be submitted in 

accordance with the requirements set 

forth in the corresponding FFO 

announcement. 

Evaluation Criteria: All qualified 

proposals will be evaluated based on the 

applicant’s ability to align the program 

criteria to NIST MEP’s Next Generation 

Strategy: Continuous Improvement, 

Technology Acceleration, Supplier 

Development, Sustainability and 

Workforce. The NIST MEP Next 

Generation Strategy can be found at 

http://www.mep.nist.gov. 

Applications from existing or 

previous MEP manufacturing extension 

Centers or partners must contain 

specific information that addresses 

whether the applicant’s past 

performance with the program is 

indicative of expected performance 

under a possible new award and 

describing how and why performance is 

expected to be the same or different. 

The following criteria will be utilized 

by an evaluation panel to rate the 


Cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 26 / Tuesday, February 9, 2010 / Notices 6357 

proposals. Each proposal should 

address all four evaluation criteria, 

which are assigned equal weighting. 

(1) Identification of Target Firms in 

Proposed Region. Does the proposal 

clearly address the entire service region, 

providing for a large enough population 

of target firms of small- and mediumsized manufacturers that the applicant 

understands and can serve, and which 

is not presently served by an existing 

Center? 

i. Market Analysis. Demonstrated 

understanding of the service region’s 

manufacturing base, including business 

size, industry types, product mix, and 

technology requirements. 

ii. Geographical Location. Physical 

size, concentration of industry, and 

economic significance of the service 

region’s manufacturing base. 

Geographical diversity of the Center as 

compared to existing Centers will be a 

factor in evaluation of proposals. 

(2) Technology Resources. Does the 

proposal assure strength in technical 

personnel and programmatic resources, 

full-time staff, facilities, equipment, and 

linkages to external sources of 

technology to develop and transfer 

technologies related to NIST research 

results and expertise in the technical 

areas noted in the MEP regulations 

found at 15 CFR Part 290 as well as from 

other sources of technology research 

and development? 

(3) Technology Delivery Mechanisms. 

Does the proposal clearly and sharply 

define an effective methodology for 

delivering advanced manufacturing 

technology to small- and medium-sized 

manufacturers and mechanism(s) for 

accelerating the adoption of 

technologies for both process 

improvement and new product 

adoption? 

i. Linkages. Development of effective 

partnerships or linkages to third parties 

such as industry, universities, nonprofit 

economic organizations, and state 

governments who will amplify the 

Center’s technology delivery to reach a 

large number of clients in its service 

region. 

ii. Program Leverage. Provision of an 

effective strategy to amplify the Center’s 

technology delivery approaches to 

achieve the proposed objectives as 

described in 15 CFR 290.3(e). 

(4) Management and Financial Plan. 

Does the proposal define a management 

structure and assure management 

personnel to carry out development and 

operation of an effective Center? 

i. Organizational Structure. 

Completeness and appropriateness of 

the organizational structure, and its 

focus on the mission of the Center. 

Assurance of local full-time top 

management of the Center. This 

includes a clearly presented Oversight 

Board structure with a membership 

representing small- and medium-sized 

manufacturers in the region. MEP has 

determined that centers clearly benefit 

when a majority or more of its Board 

members/Trustees compose a 

membership representing principally 

small and medium manufacturing as 

well as committed partners and do not 

have dual obligations to more than one 

Center. Two-thirds of the members of 

the Center’s oversight board must not be 

members of any other MEP Center 

boards. 

ii. Program Management. 

Effectiveness of the planned 

methodology of program management. 

This includes committed local partners 

and demonstrated experience of the 

leadership team in manufacturing, 

outreach and partnership development. 

iii. Internal Evaluation. Effectiveness 

of the planned continuous internal 

evaluation of program activities. The 

proposal must provide the methodology 

for continuous internal evaluation of the 

program activities and demonstrate the 

effectiveness of defined methodology. 

iv. Plans for Financial Cost Share. 

Demonstrated stability and duration of 

the applicant’s funding commitments as 

well as the percentage of operating and 

capital costs guaranteed by the 

applicant. Identification of the sources 

of cost share and the general terms of 

funding commitments. The total level of 

cost share and detailed rationale of the 

cost share, both cash and in-kind, must 

be documented in the budget submitted 

with the proposal and will be 

considered as part of the evaluation 

review. Applicants proposing more than 

the minimum required cost share will 

be assessed more favorably in 

proportion to any increased cost share 

amount. 

v. Budget. Suitability and focus of the 

applicant’s detailed one-year budget and 

budget outline for years 2–5 and 

beyond. 

Review and Selection Process: 

Proposal evaluation and selection will 

consist of four principal phases: 

Proposal qualification, proposal review, 

site visits and award determination. 

a. Proposal Qualification 

NIST will review all proposals to 

assure compliance with the proposal 

content as described in 15 CFR 290.5 

and the provisions of this notice. 

Proposals that satisfy these 

requirements will be designated as 

qualified proposals. Non-qualified 

proposals will not be evaluated and 

applicants will be notified of 

disqualification. 

b. Proposal Review 

NIST will appoint an evaluation 

panel, consisting of at least one nonFederal Government employee and at 

least two Federal Government 

employees, to conduct independent and 

objective reviews and evaluations of all 

qualified proposals in accordance with 

the evaluation criteria set forth in this 

notice. Based upon this review, the each 

reviewer will assign a numeric score for 

each qualified proposal based on the 

evaluation criteria. The reviewers may 

discuss the proposal with each other, 

but scores will be determined on an 

individual basis, not as a consensus. 

Proposals with an average score of 70 or 

higher out of 100 will be deemed 

finalists and will receive site visits. 

c. Site Visits 

NIST representatives (the same 

evaluation panel reviewers) will visit 

each finalist organization. Finalists will 

be reviewed and numeric scores 

adjusted using the criteria set forth in 

§ 290.6 of these procedures assigning 

equal weight to each of the four 

categories. NIST may enter into 

negotiations with the finalists 

concerning any aspect of their proposal. 

Proposals are then ranked based on 

the sum of the reviewers’ final numeric 

scores. The ranked proposals are then 

submitted to the Selecting Official, the 

Director of the NIST MEP Program. 

d. Award Determination 

The Director of the NIST MEP 

Program shall make funding 

recommendations to NIST Grants 

Officer based on the rank order of 

applicants and the following selection 

factors: Availability of Federal funds, 

the need to assure appropriate regional 

distribution, and whether the project 

duplicates other projects funded by the 

Department of Commerce or other 

Federal agencies. 

The final approval of selected 

applications and award of financial 

assistance will be made by the NIST 

Grants Officer based on compliance 

with application requirements as 

published in this notice, compliance 

with applicable legal and regulatory 

requirements, and whether the 

recommended applicants appear to be 

responsible. Applicants may be asked to 

modify objectives, work plans, or 

budgets and provide supplemental 

information required by the agency 

prior to award. As a result of the 

selection process, NIST may fund all, 

some, or parts of the eligible 

applications submitted, or none at all. 

The decision of the Grants Officer is 

final. 


Cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
6358 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 26 / Tuesday, February 9, 2010 / Notices 

Unsuccessful applicants will be 

notified in writing. The Program will 

retain one copy of each unsuccessful 

application for three years for record 

keeping purposes. The remaining copies 

will be destroyed. 

The Department of Commerce PreAward Notification Requirements for 

Grants and Cooperative Agreements: 

The Department of Commerce PreAward Notification Requirements for 

Grants and Cooperative Agreements, 

which are contained in the Federal 

Register Notice of February 11, 2008 (73 

FR 7696), are applicable to this notice. 

Please refer to 

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/. 

Dun and Bradstreet Data Universal 

Numbering System: On the form SF–424 

items 8.b. and 8.c., the applicant’s 9- 

digit Employer/Taxpayer Identification 

Number (EIN/TIN) and 9-digit Dun and 

Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering 

System (DUNS) number must be 

consistent with the information on the 

Central Contractor Registration (CCR) 

(http://www.ccr.gov) and Automated 

Standard Application for Payment 

System (ASAP). For complex 

organizations with multiple EIN/TIN 

and DUNS numbers, the EIN/TIN and 

DUNS number MUST be the numbers 

for the applying organization. 

Organizations that provide incorrect/ 

inconsistent EIN/TIN and DUNS 

numbers may experience significant 

delays in receiving funds if their 

proposal is selected for funding. Please 

confirm that the EIN/TIN and DUNS 

number are consistent with the 

information on the CCR and ASAP. 

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. 

Funding Availability and Limitation 

of Liability: The funding periods and 

funding amounts referenced in this 

notice and request for proposals are 

subject to the availability of funds, as 

well as to Department of Commerce and 

NIST priorities at the time of award. The 

Department of Commerce and NIST will 

not be held responsible for proposal 

preparation costs. Publication of this 

notice does not obligate the Department 

of Commerce or NIST to award any 

specific grant or cooperative agreement 

or to obligate all or any part of available 

funds. 

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: Applications 

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 rules relating 

to public property, loans, grants, 

benefits or contracts (5 U.S.C. 553 (a)). 

Because notice and comment are not 

required under 5 U.S.C 553, or any other 

law, for rules 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. 

Dated: February 4, 2010. 

Marc G. Stanley, 

Acting Deputy Directo. 

[FR Doc. 2010–2799 Filed 2–8–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Office of the Secretary 

Federal Advisory Committee; Defense 

Advisory Board for Employer Support 

of the Guard and Reserve; Defense 

Advisory Board for Employer 

Partnership; Charter Revision 

AGENCY: Department of Defense (DoD). 

ACTION: Federal advisory committee 

charter. 

SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the 

Federal Advisory Committee Act of 

1972, (5 U.S.C. Appendix, as amended), 

the Sunshine in the Government Act of 

1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and 

41 CFR 102–3.65, the Department of 

Defense gives notice that it intends to 

revise the charter for the Defense 

Advisory Board for Employer Support of 

the Guard and Reserve. Specifically, the 

Department is: changing the name of the 

committee from the Defense Advisory 

Board for Employer Support of the 

Guard and Reserve to the Defense 

Advisory Board for Employer 

Partnership; changing the charter’s 

Objective and Scope from examining 

matters arising from the military service 

obligations of members of the National 

Guard and Reserve and the impact on 

their civilian employment to providing 

independent advice and 

recommendations concerning the 

impact of military service as it applies 

to civilian employers; and changing the 

Agency or Official to Whom the 

Committee Reports to include the Under 

Secretary of Defense (Personnel and 

Readiness). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim 

Freeman, DoD Committee Management 

Office, 703–601–6128. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Defense Advisory Board for Employer 

Partnership, pursuant to 41 CFR 102– 

3.50(d), is a discretionary Federal 

advisory committee established to 

provide the Secretary of Defense 

through the Under Secretary of Defense 

(Personnel and Readiness) and the 

Assistant Secretary of Defense (Reserve 

Affairs), with independent advice and 

recommendations concerning the 

impact of military service as it applies 

to civilian employers. 

Pursuant to DoD policy, the Under 

Secretary of Defense (Personnel and 

Readiness) and Assistant Secretary of 

Defense (Reserve Affairs) is authorized 

to act upon the Board’s advice and 

recommendations. 

The Board shall be comprised of no 

more than 15 members appointed by the 

Secretary of Defense. 

Board members shall be appointed by 

the Secretary of Defense and their 

appointments shall be renewed on an 

annual basis. Members who are not fulltime federal officers or employees, shall 

be appointed as experts and consultants 

under the authority of 5 U.S.C 3109, and 

serve as Special Government 

Employees. 

Board members, with approval of the 

Secretary of Defense, may serve a term 

of three years on the Board; however, no 

Board member may serve more than six 

years on the Board. 

The Board shall have two CoChairpersons. One Co-Chairperson shall 

be the National Chair of the Employer 

Support of the Guard and Reserve. This 

ex-officio appointment shall have the 

same voting rights as the other Board 

members. The second Co-Chairperson 

shall be appointed by the Assistant 

Secretary of Defense (Reserve Affairs) 

from the Board membership at large. To 

ensure continuity, the terms of the CoVerDate Nov<24>2008 14:39 Feb 08, 2010 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09FEN1.SGM 09FEN1

Cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES