Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 32 / Thursday, February 15, 2001 / Notices 10555

of 1961, Public Law 87–256, as

amended, also known as the FulbrightHays 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 cited above is provided

through the Bureau of Educational and

Cultural Affairs.

Notice

The terms and conditions published

in this RFGP are binding and may not

be modified by any Bureau

representative. Explanatory information

provided by the Bureau that contradicts

published language will not be binding.

Issuance of the RFGP does not

constitute an award commitment on the

part of the Government. The Bureau

reserves the right to reduce, revise, or

increase proposal budgets in accordance

with the needs of the program and the

availability of funds. In addition, it

reserves the right to accept proposals in

whole or in part and make an award or

awards in accordance with what serves

the best interest of the Regional Scholar

Exchange Program. 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 Bureau procedures.

Dated: February 7, 2001.

Helena Kane Finn,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Educational

and Cultural Affairs, U.S. Department of

State.

[FR Doc. 01–3756 Filed 2–14–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710–05–U

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 3577]

Bureau of Educational and Cultural

Affairs Request for Grant Proposals:

Internet Access and Training Program

in the Western NIS

SUMMARY: The Office of Academic

Exchange Programs/European Programs

Branch of the Bureau of Educational and

Cultural Affairs (ECA) announces an

open competition for the Internet

Access and Training Program in the

Western NIS. Public and private nonprofit organizations meeting the

provisions described in IRS regulation

26 CFR 1.501(c) may submit proposals

to administer the Internet Access and

Training Program (IATP) in the Western

NIS (Belarus, Moldova and Ukraine).

The grantee organization will oversee

and carry out IATP operations,

including the establishment of new

IATP sites in the Western NIS, the

maintenance and enhancement of

existing sites, the development of

Internet outreach and educational

projects, and engaging ECA alumni and

other interested groups in the IATP. All

activities of the IATP will be undertaken

in regular and consistent consultation

with the Public Affairs Section (PAS) of

the U.S. Embassy in each participating

country.

Program Information

Overview

The IATP sponsors public access

Internet sites throughout the former

Soviet Union. The IATP makes e-mail

and the World Wide Web available to

ECA alumni and other target audiences

through its support of these Internet

sites. IATP sites are typically located at

public libraries, NGOs and universities

with which the IATP administering

organization has entered into mutually

beneficial agreements that govern how

the sites are managed and maintained.

In addition, the IATP serves as a means

to train its target audiences in the

effective and meaningful use of the

World Wide Web, including instruction

in the design and maintenance of

websites, databases and distance

education courses. The goals of the

program are to promote the

development of on-line information

resources in the Western NIS and to

facilitate the exposure of ECA alumni

and targeted audiences to the World

Wide Web. The IATP also sponsors a

small grants competition by which ECA

alumni and other groups may receive

funding for Internet projects of their

own design.

Subject to the availability of funds, it

is anticipated that this grant will begin

on or about September 1, 2001. Please

refer to the Solicitation Package for

further information.

Budget Guidelines

Grants awarded to eligible

organizations with less than four years

of experience in conducting

international exchange programs will be

limited to $60,000.

Applicants must submit a

comprehensive budget for the entire

program. ECA anticipates awarding one

grant in the amount of $1,750,000

($350,000 for Belarus; $400,000 for

Moldova; $1,000,000 for Ukraine) to

support the program and administrative

costs required to implement this

program. ECA encourages applicants to

provide maximum levels of cost sharing

and funding from private sources in

support of its programs. There must be

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.

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–01–11.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The

Office of Academic Exchanges, ECA/A/

E/EUR, Room 246, U.S. Department of

State, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington,

DC 20547, tel. (202) 205–0525, fax (202)

260–7985, exchanges@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 Sheila Casey on all

other inquiries and correspondence.

Please read the complete Federal

Register announcement before sending

inquiries or submitting proposals. Once

the RFGP deadline has passed,

Department of State 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 on Friday, April 6, 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

10556 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 32 / Thursday, February 15, 2001 / Notices

that the proposals are received by the

above deadline.

Applicants must follow all

instructions in the Solicitation Package.

The original and eight (8) 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–01–11, Program

Management, ECA/EX/PM, Room 534,

301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC

20547.

Applicants must also submit the

‘‘Executive Summary’’ and ‘‘Proposal

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 the

Public Affairs Sections at U.S.

Embassies 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, socioeconomic 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 in their program contents, 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. All

eligible proposals will be reviewed by

the program office, as well as by the

Public Diplomacy Sections overseas,

where appropriate. Eligible proposals

will be subject to compliance with

Federal and ECA regulations and

guidelines and forwarded to Department

of State 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

ECA’s 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 and

Management: The proposal should

exhibit originality, substance, precision,

innovation, and relevance to ECA’s

mission. Objectives should be

reasonable, feasible and flexible. The

proposal should clearly demonstrate

how the grantee organization will meet

the program’s objectives. A relevant

work plan should demonstrate

substantive undertakings and logistical

capacity. The work plan should adhere

to the program overview and guidelines

described above.

2. Multiplier Effect/Impact: The IATP

should strengthen long-term mutual

understanding, including maximum

sharing of information and Internet

expertise. The grantee organization

should include ECA alumni as a

resource for facilitating IATP outreach

and education.

3. Support of Diversity: The proposal

should demonstrate the grantee

organization’s commitment to

promoting the awareness and

understanding of diversity through

geographic distribution of IATP sites

and outreach to groups identified in

consultation with PAS officers in

Belarus, Moldova and Ukraine.

4. Institution’s Record/Ability: The

proposal should demonstrate an

institutional record of successful

administration of Internet programs.

Proposed personnel and institutional

resources should be adequate and

appropriate to achieve the program’s

goals.

5. Project Evaluation: The proposal

should include a plan to evaluate the

success of the IATP. ECA recommends

that the proposal include a draft survey

questionnaire or other technique, plus a

description of methodologies that can be

used to link outcomes to original project

objectives. The grantee organization will

be expected to submit periodic progress

reports that elucidate the successes

achieved, and obstacles encountered, by

the IATP.

6. Cost-effectiveness and Cost

Sharing: 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. The proposal

should maximize cost sharing through

other private sector support as well as

institutional direct funding

contributions.

7. Follow-on and Sustainability: The

proposal should provide a plan for

continued follow-on activity that

ensures that ECA-supported programs

are not isolated events, but have

meaning and scope beyond the time the

actual exchange took place. The

proposal should address the feasibility

of sustaining viable IATP sites and

training seminars after ECA funding

ends.

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 FulbrightHays 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 in part

through the FREEDOM Support Act of

1993.

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

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 32 / Thursday, February 15, 2001 / Notices 10557

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: February 9, 2001.

Helena Kane Finn,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Educational

and Cultural Affairs, U.S. Department of

State.

[FR Doc. 01–3879 Filed 2–14–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710–05–P

TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY

Supplemental Environmental Impact

Statement: Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant

Operating License Renewal

AGENCY: Tennessee Valley Authority.

ACTION: Notice of intent.

SUMMARY: This notice is provided in

accordance with the Council on

Environmental Quality’s regulations (40

CFR parts 1500–1508) and TVA’s

procedures for implementing the

National Environmental Policy Act. The

Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) will

prepare a supplemental environmental

impact statement (SEIS) to address the

environmental impacts associated with

obtaining license extensions for the

Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant (BFN)

located in Limestone County, Alabama.

Renewal of the operating licenses will

allow the plant to continue to operate

for an additional 20 years beyond the

expiration dates of the current operating

licenses. The regulations of the Nuclear

Regulatory Commission (NRC) in 10

CFR part 54 set forth the applicable

license extension requirements. This

SEIS will also consider the impacts of

the possible restart of Unit 1, which has

been in a non-operational status since

1985, with an extended operating

license. At this early stage, TVA

contemplates that the action alternatives

in the EIS could include a combination

of license renewal and restart of Unit 1.

The no-action alternative considered is

a decision by TVA to not seek renewal

of the operating licenses for the BFN

units. Public comment is invited

concerning both the scope of

alternatives and environmental issues

that should be addressed as part of the

SEIS.

DATES: Comments on the scope of the

SEIS must be postmarked or e-mailed no

later than March 23, 2001 to ensure

consideration.

ADDRESSES: Written comments or emails on the scope of issues to be

addressed in the SEIS should be sent to

Bruce L. Yeager, Senior Specialist,

National Environmental Policy Act,

Environmental Policy and Planning,

Tennessee Valley Authority, 400 West

Summit Hill Drive, Mail Stop WT 8C–

K, Knoxville, Tennessee 37902 (e-mail:

blyeager@tva.gov).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Charles L. Wilson, Nuclear Licensing

Staff, Tennessee Valley Authority, 1101

Market Street, Mail Stop BR 4X–C,

Chattanooga, Tennessee, 37402 (e-mail:

clwilson@tva.gov), Roy V. Carter,

Tennessee Valley Authority, Mail Stop

CEB 4C–M, Muscle Shoals, Alabama,

35662 (e-mail: rvcarter@tva.gov) or

Bruce Yeager, Tennessee Valley

Authority, 400 West Summit Hill Drive,

Mail Stop WT 8C–K, Knoxville,

Tennessee 37902 (e-mail:

blyeager@tva.gov).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The proposal to renew the operating

licenses for the Browns Ferry Nuclear

Plant (BFN) was part of a system-wide

evaluation of future power needs. A

range of options to meet those needs

was evaluated in TVA’s Integrated

Resource Plan and Environmental

Impact Statement, Energy Vision 2020,

released on December 21, 1995.

The Final Environmental Statement

for BFN was published in 1972. BFN

was TVA’s first nuclear power plant.

The facility is located on an 840-acre

tract adjacent to Wheeler Reservoir in

Limestone County, Alabama, 10 miles

southwest of Athens, Alabama. BFN has

three General Electric boiling water

reactors and associated turbinegenerators that can produce more than

3,000 megawatts (MW) of power. Unit 1

began commercial operation in August

1974, Unit 2 in 1975 and Unit 3 in 1977.

An extended shutdown of all units at

Browns Ferry began in 1985 to review

the TVA nuclear power program. Unit 2

returned to service in May 1991 and

Unit 3 in November 1995. Unit 1 has

been idled since 1985, and changes

would be necessary prior to restarting

the unit. The current operating

characteristics of Units 2 and 3 are

considered representative of future

operations at Browns Ferry because of

the changes in personnel, procedures,

and equipment that occurred during and

following the extended regulatory

outage which began in 1985. For

example, since return to service from

the regulatory outage, Units 2 and 3

have performed well with consistently

higher levels of availability and

generating capacity than before the

outage.

Proposed Action

TVA proposes to submit an

application to the Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC) requesting renewal

of BFN operating licenses. Renewal of

the current operating licenses would

permit operation for an additional

twenty years past the current (original)

40-year operating license terms which

expire in 2014 and 2016 for Units 2 and

3, respectively. The Unit 1 operating

license expires in 2013. License renewal

of the operating BFN facilities does not

involve new major construction or

modifications beyond normal

maintenance and minor refurbishment.

The SEIS will also examine the

impacts associated with the possible

recovery and restart of Unit 1, which

has been in a non-operational status for

15 years. Among the impacts to be

examined in this SEIS are those

resulting from thermal (heat) discharges

to Wheeler Reservoir associated with

three-unit operation. The cooling

capaicity necessary to mitigate thermal

impacts under the various alternatives

would also be examined in the SEIS.

Other aspects of the actions under

consideration include the impacts

associated with a spent fuel storage

facility and a few new office buildings.

Independent of the matters

considered in the SEIS, TVA is

considering a project which would

uprate the maximum operating power

level of Units 2 and 3 to 120 percent of

their originally licensed power levels. If

this project is approved, the various

alternatives in the SEIS will be modified

as appropriate to reflect the higher

operating levels. If Unit 1 is returned to

service, it is currently contemplated that

it would also be operated at 120 percent

of its originally licensed power level.

Additional information about the uprate

project is available from the contacts

listed above.

Range of Alternatives

As required by Council on

Environmental Quality (CEQ)

regulations (40 CFR 1502.14), TVA will

evaluate a reasonable range of

alternatives in this SEIS. Action

alternatives TVA is currently

considering include license extensions

for Units 2 and 3 to continue power

operation for an additional 20 years, and

the possible return to service of Unit 1

with a 20-year license extension. TVA

will also consider a ‘‘no action’’

alternative which would be a decision

by the TVA Board of Directors to not