Bureau of International Labor Affairs, Office of Trade and Labor Affairs: Questions and Answers for Solicitation for Cooperative Agreement Application (SGA) 07-02, Strengthening Labor Compliance in the Agricultural Sector in Central America and the Dominican Republic, 7679-7680 [E7-2740]

Download as PDF sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 32 / Friday, February 16, 2007 / Notices Comments should be sent to Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503, Telephone: 202–395–7316; Fax: 202–395–6974 (these are not toll-free numbers), within 30 days from the date of this publication in the Federal Register. The OMB is particularly interested in comments which: • Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; • Evaluate the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; • Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and • Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. Agency: Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Type of Review: Extension without change of currently approved collection. Title: Manufacturer’s Certification of Modifications Made to Construction Aerial Lifts (29 CFR 1926.453). OMB Number: 1218–0216. Type of Response: Recordkeeping. Affected Public: Public Sector: Business or other for-profits. Number of Respondents: 62. Number of Annual Responses: 62. Estimated Time per Response: 6 minutes. Total Burden Hours: 6. Total Annualized capital/startup costs: $0. Total Annual Costs (operating/ maintaining systems or purchasing services): $0. Description: The objective of the Aerial Lifts Standard, ‘‘the Standard’’ at 29 CFR 1926.453 to protect employees who operate, or work near, aerial lifts. The only information collection requirement in the Aerial Lifts Standard is a certification provision, paragraph (a)(2). This provision requires an employer who field modifies an aerial lift for a use not intended by the lift manufacturer (‘‘field modified aerial lift’’) to obtain from that manufacturer, VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:03 Feb 15, 2007 Jkt 211001 or an equivalent entity (such as a nationally-recognized laboratory), a written certificate stating that: The modification conforms to the applicable provisions of ANSI A92.2–1969 and OSHA’s Aerial Lifts Standard; and the modified aerial lift is at least as safe as it was before modification. Employers use the certification required in paragraph (a)(2) of the Standard as a record of equipment modification and to demonstrate to interested parties (e.g., OSHA compliance officers, renters, lessees, owners) that the modified aerial lift remains at least as safe for employees, as the original equipment. Additionally, the certification provides the best means by which an OSHA compliance officer can determine that the manufacturer or an equally-qualified entity assessed a field modified aerial lift and found that it was safe for use by, or near, employees, and would provide employees with a level of protection at least equivalent to the protection afforded by the lift in its original configuration. Finally, employees may review the information on the certificate; such a review will provide them with information that they can use to determine the safety of the modified lifts. Darrin A. King, Acting Departmental Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E7–2745 Filed 2–15–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–28–P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Bureau of International Labor Affairs, Office of Trade and Labor Affairs. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: In response to the subject solicitation, inquiries have been received regarding the requirements of the solicitation. This notice publishes the inquiries and the responses to the inquiries. Due to the pending closing date of February 23, 2007 no further questions will be entertained. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa Harvey, Department of Labor, Procurement Services Center, S–4307, 200 Constitution Ave, NW., Washington DC, 20210, Telephone (202) 693–4592, e-mail: Harvey-lisa@dol.gov. PO 00000 Frm 00089 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Q: Could you confirm that the grant seeks projects serving Central American laborers working in the countries listed, i.e., not migrant laborers working in Central America and/or the United States? A. The project seeks to serve Central American Laborers working in the countries listed. Q. Is the aim of the project to help Central American laborers vindicate their rights under existing labor laws in their countries of origin, or also to help influence change in those laws for the better? A. The SGA states ‘‘this project provides assistance to improve the effective enforcement of national labor laws by strengthening the capacity of local organizations to provide advice to workers about the scope and applicability of relevant labor laws, and when necessary, provide legal services explaining the procedural and documentation requirements to exercise those rights.’’ Q. If an organization wishes to apply to tackle part of the project (i.e., in one or two of the countries concerned, rather than all), can it do so on its own, or must it do so as part of a larger association? A. The Applicant must demonstrate how it will undertake activities in all countries listed, whether alone or through an association of organizations. Signed this 12th day of February 2007. Lisa Harvey, Grant Officer. [FR Doc. E7–2739 Filed 2–15–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–28–P Bureau of International Labor Affairs, Office of Trade and Labor Policy: Questions and Answers for Solicitation for Cooperative Agreement Application (SGA) 07–03, Strengthening Labor Systems in Central America: Establishing Worker Rights Centers SUMMARY: 7679 DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Bureau of International Labor Affairs, Office of Trade and Labor Affairs: Questions and Answers for Solicitation for Cooperative Agreement Application (SGA) 07–02, Strengthening Labor Compliance in the Agricultural Sector in Central America and the Dominican Republic Bureau of International Labor Affairs, Office of Trade and Labor Affairs. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: SUMMARY: In response to the subject solicitation, inquiries have been received regarding the requirements of the solicitation. This notice publishes the inquiries and the responses to the inquiries. Due to the pending closing date of February 23, 2007 no further questions will be entertained. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa Harvey, Department of Labor, E:\FR\FM\16FEN1.SGM 16FEN1 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES 7680 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 32 / Friday, February 16, 2007 / Notices Procurement Services Center, Room S– 4307, 200 Constitution Ave, NW., Washington DC, 20210, Telephone (202) 693–4592, e-mail: Harvey-lisa@dol.gov. Q: I am aware that this proposal concerns all C.A.F.T.A. countries but I am wondering if there are priority countries concerning this specific grant. My question is whether or not it is possible to submit a proposal for just one of the C.A.F.T.A countries (such as Honduras), or perhaps just 3 or 4 of the C.A.F.T.A. countries, or does the grant require a regional proposal? A: The project must undertake activities in all countries within the lifetime of the grant, beginning at a minimum the first year in El Salvador and Nicaragua. The applicants experience may be in only one or more of the countries, but the proposed activities must eventually roll out to all the countries and will be judged on the merits of how it plans to do this. Specifically, the SGA states: Applicants should submit proposals that are regional in scope and demonstrate the organization’s capabilities to implement a project in accordance with the Statement of Work and the selection criteria. Proposals must provide for activities in all countries, and begin the first year at a minimum in El Salvador and Nicaragua. Applicants will not be penalized for lacking previous experience working on regional projects. For example, organizations with experience in only one country will be judged based on the success they achieved in that country and their proposal for working successfully throughout the rest of the targeted region. USDOL encourages applicants to be creative in proposing innovative and cost-effective interventions that will produce a demonstrable and sustainable impact. Q: Would DOL be interested in receiving a proposal that focuses on DOL’s stated objectives but as related to migrant workers? Such a proposal/ project could potentially compliment other proposals? a. Related question to that, given that migrant populations are more significant in some Central American countries than others, could IOM propose activities based on the countries with significant populations, rather than in all the stated countries? b. And finally, if DOL would be interested in migrant focused proposal, would they prefer we submit a joint proposal with another organization that could take on all the other non-migrant workers? A: Please ensure that any proposals submitted respond to the objectives VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:03 Feb 15, 2007 Jkt 211001 outlined in the SGA, which do not specify migrant worker rights. Q. The solicitation asks that labor law compliance is improved in the DR, Nicaragua, and either Guatemala or Honduras. Is there a preference one way or the other on Guatemala or Honduras? Would DOL like an explanation for why one country is chosen over the other? A. DOL does not have a preference between either country. Regarding your question as to whether DOL needs an explanation as to why one country was chosen over another, the Applicant would be expected to demonstrate ‘‘the extent to which the application sets forth a clear and supportable course of action to improve labor law compliance’’ in the particular countries included in their proposal. Q. The Award Information explains that the duration of the project funded by this solicitation is up to four years. Does DOL place additional weight on proposals that are for the full 4 years or are projects that run for less time (2 or 3 years) considered on an equal playing field as those that propose 4 years? Obviously we would need to weight the amount of programming that can get done in 3 countries over a considerable amount of time with the amount of funding allocated. A. The Applicant will be judged on the merits of their proposed strategy to achieve sustainable results. The SGA states ‘‘Applicants will be evaluated on the clear identification and description of the specific strategy(s) the applicant proposes to use, and the effectiveness and attainability of project objectives by the end of the grant period’’. Q. The RFA reads ‘‘an applicant must demonstrate a country presence, independently or through a relationship with another organization(s) with country presence, which gives it the ability to initiate program activities upon award of the Cooperative Agreement’’. (said organization) currently has a country office in Honduras and has worked in Nicaragua and the DR in the past. I read that to mean that we would need to identify local partners that would be working with (said organization) on implementation in each country and they would be prepared and ready to begin implementation upon reception of the award. Is this an accurate reading or would (said organization) need to have some sort of office open in each country prior to the award? A. (Said organization) would not necessarily need to have an office open in each country prior to the award, however it would have to demonstrate country presence ‘‘independently or through a relationship with another PO 00000 Frm 00090 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 organization(s) with country presence, which gives it the ability to initiate program activities upon award of the Cooperative Agreement.’’ Q. From what I understand, DOL requires that our agreements with local organizations be in the form of contracts. Is this an accurate representation of DOL requirements everywhere? From our work in (country X), local NGOs would not have the capacity to operate under a traditional contract mechanism in that they do not have the capital to advance funding for work, but would instead require a subaward to implement a project. Would this be acceptable? A: The SGA consistently uses the terms ‘‘subaward’’ which can be either be a sub-contract or a sub-grant. Signed this 12th day of February 2007. Lisa Harvey, Grant Officer. [FR Doc. E7–2740 Filed 2–15–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–28–P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration High Growth Job Training Initiative Grants for the Long-Term Care Sector of the Health Care Industry; Solicitation for Grant Applications Announcement Type: New. Notice of solicitation for grant applications. Funding Opportunity Number: SGA/ DFA PY–06–07. Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance CFDA Number: 17.268. Key Dates: Applications are due by April 5, 2007. A Webinar for prospective applicants will be held for this grant competition on March 5, 2007. Access information for the Webinar will be posted on the U.S. Department of Labor’s Employment and Training Administration (ETA) Web site at https://www.doleta.gov/BRG/Indprof/ Health.cfm. Summary: The Employment and Training Administration (ETA), U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), announces the availability of approximately $2.5 million in grant funds for demanddriven regional approaches to meeting the workforce challenges of the longterm care sector of the health care industry under the President’s High Growth Job Training Initiative. The President’s High Growth Job Training Initiative (HGJTI) is a strategic effort to prepare workers for new and increasing job opportunities in highgrowth, high-demand, and economically vital industries and sectors of the E:\FR\FM\16FEN1.SGM 16FEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 32 (Friday, February 16, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7679-7680]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-2740]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR


Bureau of International Labor Affairs, Office of Trade and Labor 
Affairs: Questions and Answers for Solicitation for Cooperative 
Agreement Application (SGA) 07-02, Strengthening Labor Compliance in 
the Agricultural Sector in Central America and the Dominican Republic

AGENCY: Bureau of International Labor Affairs, Office of Trade and 
Labor Affairs.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In response to the subject solicitation, inquiries have been 
received regarding the requirements of the solicitation. This notice 
publishes the inquiries and the responses to the inquiries. Due to the 
pending closing date of February 23, 2007 no further questions will be 
entertained.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa Harvey, Department of Labor,

[[Page 7680]]

Procurement Services Center, Room S-4307, 200 Constitution Ave, NW., 
Washington DC, 20210, Telephone (202) 693-4592, e-mail: Harvey-
lisa@dol.gov.
    Q: I am aware that this proposal concerns all C.A.F.T.A. countries 
but I am wondering if there are priority countries concerning this 
specific grant. My question is whether or not it is possible to submit 
a proposal for just one of the C.A.F.T.A countries (such as Honduras), 
or perhaps just 3 or 4 of the C.A.F.T.A. countries, or does the grant 
require a regional proposal?
    A: The project must undertake activities in all countries within 
the lifetime of the grant, beginning at a minimum the first year in El 
Salvador and Nicaragua. The applicants experience may be in only one or 
more of the countries, but the proposed activities must eventually roll 
out to all the countries and will be judged on the merits of how it 
plans to do this. Specifically, the SGA states: Applicants should 
submit proposals that are regional in scope and demonstrate the 
organization's capabilities to implement a project in accordance with 
the Statement of Work and the selection criteria. Proposals must 
provide for activities in all countries, and begin the first year at a 
minimum in El Salvador and Nicaragua. Applicants will not be penalized 
for lacking previous experience working on regional projects. For 
example, organizations with experience in only one country will be 
judged based on the success they achieved in that country and their 
proposal for working successfully throughout the rest of the targeted 
region. USDOL encourages applicants to be creative in proposing 
innovative and cost-effective interventions that will produce a 
demonstrable and sustainable impact.
    Q: Would DOL be interested in receiving a proposal that focuses on 
DOL's stated objectives but as related to migrant workers? Such a 
proposal/project could potentially compliment other proposals?
    a. Related question to that, given that migrant populations are 
more significant in some Central American countries than others, could 
IOM propose activities based on the countries with significant 
populations, rather than in all the stated countries?
    b. And finally, if DOL would be interested in migrant focused 
proposal, would they prefer we submit a joint proposal with another 
organization that could take on all the other non-migrant workers?
    A: Please ensure that any proposals submitted respond to the 
objectives outlined in the SGA, which do not specify migrant worker 
rights.
    Q. The solicitation asks that labor law compliance is improved in 
the DR, Nicaragua, and either Guatemala or Honduras. Is there a 
preference one way or the other on Guatemala or Honduras? Would DOL 
like an explanation for why one country is chosen over the other?
    A. DOL does not have a preference between either country. Regarding 
your question as to whether DOL needs an explanation as to why one 
country was chosen over another, the Applicant would be expected to 
demonstrate ``the extent to which the application sets forth a clear 
and supportable course of action to improve labor law compliance'' in 
the particular countries included in their proposal.
    Q. The Award Information explains that the duration of the project 
funded by this solicitation is up to four years. Does DOL place 
additional weight on proposals that are for the full 4 years or are 
projects that run for less time (2 or 3 years) considered on an equal 
playing field as those that propose 4 years? Obviously we would need to 
weight the amount of programming that can get done in 3 countries over 
a considerable amount of time with the amount of funding allocated.
    A. The Applicant will be judged on the merits of their proposed 
strategy to achieve sustainable results. The SGA states ``Applicants 
will be evaluated on the clear identification and description of the 
specific strategy(s) the applicant proposes to use, and the 
effectiveness and attainability of project objectives by the end of the 
grant period''.
    Q. The RFA reads ``an applicant must demonstrate a country 
presence, independently or through a relationship with another 
organization(s) with country presence, which gives it the ability to 
initiate program activities upon award of the Cooperative Agreement''. 
(said organization) currently has a country office in Honduras and has 
worked in Nicaragua and the DR in the past. I read that to mean that we 
would need to identify local partners that would be working with (said 
organization) on implementation in each country and they would be 
prepared and ready to begin implementation upon reception of the award. 
Is this an accurate reading or would (said organization) need to have 
some sort of office open in each country prior to the award?
    A. (Said organization) would not necessarily need to have an office 
open in each country prior to the award, however it would have to 
demonstrate country presence ``independently or through a relationship 
with another organization(s) with country presence, which gives it the 
ability to initiate program activities upon award of the Cooperative 
Agreement.''
    Q. From what I understand, DOL requires that our agreements with 
local organizations be in the form of contracts. Is this an accurate 
representation of DOL requirements everywhere? From our work in 
(country X), local NGOs would not have the capacity to operate under a 
traditional contract mechanism in that they do not have the capital to 
advance funding for work, but would instead require a sub-award to 
implement a project. Would this be acceptable?
    A: The SGA consistently uses the terms ``subaward'' which can be 
either be a sub-contract or a sub-grant.

    Signed this 12th day of February 2007.
Lisa Harvey,
Grant Officer.
[FR Doc. E7-2740 Filed 2-15-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-28-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.