Report on the Criteria and Methodology for Determining the Eligibility of Candidate Countries for Millennium Challenge Account Assistance in Fiscal Year 2009, 60359-60362 [E8-24206]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 198 / Friday, October 10, 2008 / Notices
To read or download a copy of the
new NACOSH charter, go to Docket No.
OSHA–2008–0002 at https://
www.regulations.gov, the Federal
eRulemaking Portal. The charter also is
available for inspection and copying at
the OSHA Docket Office, N–2625, U.S.
Department of Labor, 200 Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210;
telephone (202) 693–2350. In addition,
the charter may be viewed or
downloaded at the Federal Advisory
Committees Database at https://
www.fido.gov.
Authority and Signature
Edwin G. Foulke, Jr., Assistant
Secretary of Labor for Occupational
Safety and Health, directed the
preparation of this notice under the
authority granted by Sections 6(b) and
7(a) of the Occupational Safety and
Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 655, 656),
the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5
U.S.C. App. 2), 29 CFR parts 1912 and
1912a, 41 CFR 102–3, and Secretary of
Labor’s Order 5–2007 (72 FR 31160).
Signed at Washington, DC this 6th day of
October 2008.
Edwin G. Foulke, Jr.,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational
Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. E8–24189 Filed 10–9–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–26–P
MILLENNIUM CHALLENGE
CORPORATION
[MCC FR 08–15]
Report on the Criteria and
Methodology for Determining the
Eligibility of Candidate Countries for
Millennium Challenge Account
Assistance in Fiscal Year 2009
Millennium Challenge
Corporation.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This report to Congress is
provided in accordance with section
608(b) of the Millennium Challenge Act
of 2003, 22 U.S.C.A. 7701, 7707(b) (the
‘‘Act’’).
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Dated: October 7, 2008.
Henry Pitney,
(Acting) Vice President and General Counsel,
Millennium Challenge Corporation.
Report on the Criteria and Methodology
for Determining the Eligibility of
Candidate Countries for Millennium
Challenge Account Assistance in Fiscal
Year 2009 Summary
This report to Congress is provided in
accordance with section 608(b) of the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:11 Oct 09, 2008
Jkt 217001
Millennium Challenge Act of 2003, 22
U.S.C.A. 7701, 7707(b) (the Act).
The Act authorizes the provision of
Millennium Challenge Account (MCA)
assistance to countries that enter into
compacts with the United States to
support policies and programs that
advance the prospects of such countries
achieving lasting economic growth and
poverty reduction. The Act requires the
Millennium Challenge Corporation
(MCC) to take a number of steps in
determining the countries that, based on
their demonstrated commitment to just
and democratic governance, economic
freedom and investing in their people,
and the opportunity to reduce poverty
and generate economic growth in the
country, will be eligible for MCA
assistance during fiscal year 2009
(FY09). These steps include the
submission of reports to the
congressional committees specified in
the Act and the publication of notices in
the Federal Register that identify:
1. The countries that are ‘‘candidate
countries’’ for MCA assistance during
FY09 based on their per-capita income
levels and their eligibility to receive
assistance under U.S. law, and countries
that would be candidate countries but
for specified legal prohibitions on
assistance (section 608(a) of the Act);
2. The criteria and methodology that
the Board of Directors of MCC (the
Board) will use to measure and evaluate
the relative policy performance of the
candidate countries consistent with the
requirements of section 607 of the Act
in order to select ‘‘MCA eligible
countries’’ from among the ‘‘candidate
countries’’ (section 608(b) of the Act);
and
3. The list of countries determined by
the Board to be ‘‘MCA eligible
countries’’ for FY09, with justification
for eligibility determination and
selection for compact negotiation,
including which of the MCA eligible
countries the Board will seek to enter
into MCA compacts (section 608(d) of
the Act).
This report sets out the criteria and
methodology to be applied in
determining eligibility for new partner
countries for FY09 MCA assistance.
The Criteria and Methodology for FY09
MCC reviews all of its indicators and
methodology annually to ensure that the
best measures are being used and, from
time to time, recommends changes or
refinements if MCC identifies better
methodologies, better indicators, or
improved sources of data. MCC takes
into account public comments received
on the previous year’s criteria and
methodology and consults with a broad
range of experts in the development
PO 00000
Frm 00132
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
60359
community and within the U.S.
Government.
MCC recommends no changes to the
selection criteria and methodology for
this fiscal year.
Potential Future Changes
Since FY07, MCC has pursued
research and consultation to explore the
possibility of adopting a new education
indicator in the Investing in People
category. However, MCC was unable to
identify an indicator that would
significantly strengthen the selection
criteria in FY09. MCC will continue to
explore potential measures. Over the
last fifteen years, much attention has
been focused on enrolling and keeping
more children in school, but not
necessarily on enhancing the quality of
education. With the support of the
World Bank, USAID, UNESCO, the
Basic Education Coalition, and others,
efforts are currently underway to
develop cross-country measures of
learning outcomes, educational quality,
and governments’ commitment to
improving educational quality.
However, these efforts are still under
development and there are currently no
education quality indicators that are
viable for MCC purposes at this time. In
assessing new indicators, MCC favors
those that: (1) Are developed by an
independent third party; (2) utilize
objective and high quality data that rely
upon an analytically rigorous
methodology; (3) are publicly available;
(4) have broad country coverage; (5) are
comparable across countries; (6) have a
clear theoretical or empirical link to
economic growth and poverty
reduction; (7) are policy linked (i.e.,
measure factors that governments can
influence within a two to three year
horizon); and (8) have broad consistency
in results from year to year.
Many of MCC’s candidate countries in
the lower middle income category have
realized substantial success in achieving
high levels of performance on select
Investing in People indicators. MCC will
explore options for alternative measures
of an Investing in People policy
framework that do a better job of
distinguishing among high performers
to incorporate in future fiscal years for
the lower middle income countries.
Several of MCC’s early compacts are
due to conclude within the next two
years. MCC will review whether the
selection criteria and methodology
should be modified when applied to
selecting a country as eligible for a
second compact.
Criteria and Methodology
The Board will select eligible
countries based on the following, among
E:\FR\FM\10OCN1.SGM
10OCN1
60360
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 198 / Friday, October 10, 2008 / Notices
other factors: (1) Their overall
performance in relation to their incomelevel peers in three broad policy
categories—Ruling Justly, Encouraging
Economic Freedom, and Investing in
People; (2) the opportunity to reduce
poverty and generate economic growth.
Section 607 of the Act requires that the
Board’s determination of eligibility be
based ‘‘to the maximum extent possible,
upon objective and quantifiable
indicators of a country’s demonstrated
commitment’’ to the criteria set out in
the Act. For FY09, there will be two
groups of candidate countries—low
income countries and lower middle
income countries. Low income
candidate countries refer to those
countries that have a per capita income
equal to or less than $1,785 and are not
ineligible to receive United States
economic assistance under part I of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 by
reason of the application of any
provision of the Foreign Assistance Act
or any other provision of law. Lower
middle income candidate countries are
those that have a per capita income
Ruling justly
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Encouraging economic freedom
Civil Liberties ..................................................
Political Rights ................................................
Voice and Accountability ................................
Government Effectiveness .............................
Rule of Law ....................................................
Control of Corruption ......................................
In making its determination of
eligibility with respect to a particular
candidate country, the Board will
consider whether a country performs
above the median in relation to its peers
on at least half of the indicators in the
Ruling Justly and Economic Freedom
categories, above the median on at least
three of the five indicators in the
Investing in People category, and above
the median on the Control of Corruption
indicator. One exception to this
methodology is that the median is not
used for the Inflation indicator. Instead,
to pass the Inflation indicator a
country’s inflation rate needs to be
under a fixed ceiling of 15 percent. The
Board will also take into consideration
whether a country performs
substantially below the median on any
indicator (i.e., in the bottom 25th
percentile) and has not taken
appropriate measures to address this
shortcoming. The indicator
methodology will be the predominant
basis for determining which countries
will be eligible for MCA assistance. In
addition, the Board may exercise
discretion in evaluating performance on
the indicators and determining a final
list of eligible countries.
Where necessary, the Board may also
take into account other quantitative and
qualitative information (supplemental
information) to determine whether a
country performed satisfactorily in
relation to its peers in a given category.
There are elements of the criteria set out
in the Act for which there is either
limited quantitative information (e.g.,
rights of people with disabilities) or no
well-developed performance indicator.
Until such data and/or indicators are
developed, the Board may rely on
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:11 Oct 09, 2008
between $1,786 and $3,705 and are not
ineligible to receive United States
economic assistance.
The Board will make use of seventeen
indicators to assess policy performance
of individual countries (specific
definitions of the indicators and their
sources are set out in annex A). These
indicators are grouped for purposes of
the FY09 assessment methodology
under the three policy categories listed
below.
Jkt 217001
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Inflation ........................................................
Fiscal Policy .................................................
Business Start-Up ........................................
Trade Policy .................................................
Regulatory Quality .......................................
Land Rights and Access.
additional data and qualitative
information to assess policy
performance. The Board may also
consider whether any adjustments
should be made for data gaps, lags,
trends, or other weaknesses in particular
indicators. For example, the State
Department Human Rights Report
contains qualitative information to make
an assessment on a variety of criteria
outlined by Congress, such as the rights
of people with disabilities, the treatment
of women and children, workers rights,
and human rights. Similarly, as
additional information in the area of
corruption, the Board may consider how
a country scores on Transparency
International’s Corruption Perceptions
Index and the Global Integrity Index, as
well as on the defined indicator.
Compact eligible partners are
expected to seek to maintain and
improve policy performance. MCC
recognizes that partner countries may
not meet the formal eligibility criteria
from time to time due to a number of
factors, such as changes in the peergroup median; graduation into a new
income category (e.g., from low income
to lower middle income); numerical
declines that are within the margin of
error; slight declines in policy
performance; revisions or corrections of
data; the introduction of new sub-data
sources; or changes in the indicators
used to measure performance. None of
these factors alone warrants suspension
or termination of eligibility and/or
assistance. Countries that demonstrate a
significant policy reversal can face a
warning, suspension, or termination of
eligibility and/or assistance. According
to MCC’s authorizing legislation, ‘‘[a]fter
consultation with the Board, the Chief
PO 00000
Frm 00133
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Investing in people
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Public Expenditure on Health.
Public Expenditure on Primary Education.
Immunization Rates (DPT3 and Measles).
Girls’ Primary Education Completion.
Natural Resource Management.
Executive Officer may suspend or
terminate assistance in whole or in part
for a country or entity * * * if * * *
the country or entity has engaged in a
pattern of actions inconsistent with the
criteria used to determine the eligibility
of the country or entity * * *.’’ Given
data lags, this pattern of behavior need
not be captured in the indicators for
MCC to take action. [See MCC’s Policy
on Suspension and Termination]
As provided in the Act, following the
determination of eligible countries, the
Chief Executive Officer’s Report to
Congress will set out the list of eligible
countries, identify with which of those
countries MCC will seek to enter into
compact negotiations, and include a
justification for such eligibility
determinations and selections for
compact negotiation.
Relationship to Legislative Criteria
Within each policy category, the Act
sets out a number of specific selection
criteria. As indicated above, a set of
objective and quantifiable policy
indicators is used to establish eligibility
for MCA assistance and measure the
relative performance by candidate
countries against these criteria. The
Board’s approach to determining
eligibility ensures that performance
against each of these criteria is assessed
by at least one of the seventeen objective
indicators. Most are addressed by
multiple indicators. The specific
indicators used to measure each of the
criteria set out in the Act are listed
below.
Section 607(b)(1): Just and democratic
governance, including a demonstrated
commitment to:
E:\FR\FM\10OCN1.SGM
10OCN1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 198 / Friday, October 10, 2008 / Notices
(a) Promote political pluralism,
equality and the rule of law;
Indicators—Political Rights, Civil
Liberties, Voice and Accountability,
and Rule of Law
(b) Respect human and civil rights,
including the rights of people with
disabilities;
Indicators—Political Rights, Civil
Liberties, and Voice and
Accountability
(c) Protect private property rights;
Indicators—Civil Liberties, Regulatory
Quality, Rule of Law, and Land Rights
and Access
(d) Encourage transparency and
accountability of government; and
Indicators—Political Rights, Civil
Liberties, Voice and Accountability,
Control of Corruption, Rule of Law,
and Government Effectiveness
(e) Combat corruption;
Indicators—Civil Liberties, Rule of Law,
and Control of Corruption
Section 607(b)(2): Economic freedom,
including a demonstrated commitment
to economic policies that:
(a) Encourage citizens and firms to
participate in global trade and
international capital markets;
Indicators—Fiscal Policy, Inflation,
Trade Policy, Business Start-Up, and
Regulatory Quality
(b) Promote private sector growth and
the sustainable management of natural
resources;
Indicators—Inflation, Business Start-Up,
Fiscal Policy, Land Rights and Access,
Natural
(c) Resource Management, and
Regulatory Quality strengthen market
forces in the economy; and
Indicators—Fiscal Policy, Inflation,
Trade Policy, Business Start-Up, Land
Rights and Access, and Regulatory
Quality
(d) Respect worker rights, including
the right to form labor unions;
Indicators—Civil Liberties and Voice
and Accountability
Section 607(b)(3): Investments in the
people of such country, particularly
women and children, including
programs that (A) promote broad-based
primary education and (B) strengthen
and build capacity to provide quality
public health and reduce child
mortality.
Indicators—Girls’ Primary Education
Completion, Public Expenditure on
Primary Education, Immunization
Rates, Public Expenditure on Health,
and Natural Resource Management
Where necessary the Board will also
draw on supplemental data and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:11 Oct 09, 2008
Jkt 217001
qualitative information, including the
State Department’s Human Rights
Report, Transparency International’s
Corruption Perceptions Index, and the
Global Integrity Index.
Annex A to Report: Indicator
Definitions
The following 17 indicators will be
used to measure candidate countries’
demonstrated commitment to the
criteria found in section 607(b) of the
Act. The indicators are intended to
assess the degree to which the political
and economic conditions in a country
serve to promote broad-based
sustainable economic growth and
reduction of poverty; and thus provide
a sound environment for the use of
MCA funds. The indicators are not goals
in themselves; rather they measure
policies that are linked to broad-based
sustainable economic growth. The
indicators were selected based on their
relationship to economic growth and
poverty reduction, the number of
countries they cover, their transparency
and availability, and their relative
soundness and objectivity. Where
possible, the indicators are developed
by independent sources.
Ruling Justly
1. Civil Liberties: A panel of
independent experts rates countries on:
Freedom of expression; association and
organizational rights; rule of law and
human rights; and personal autonomy
and economic rights. Source: Freedom
House.
2. Political Rights: A panel of
independent experts rates countries on:
The prevalence of free and fair elections
of officials with real power; the ability
of citizens to form political parties that
may compete fairly in elections;
freedom from domination by the
military, foreign powers, totalitarian
parties, religious hierarchies and
economic oligarchies; and the political
rights of minority groups. Source:
Freedom House.
3. Voice and Accountability: An index
of surveys that rates countries on: The
ability of institutions to protect civil
liberties; the extent to which citizens of
a country are able to participate in the
selection of governments; and the
independence of the media. Source:
World Bank Institute.
4. Government Effectiveness: An
index of surveys that rates countries on:
The quality of public service provision;
civil servants’ competency and
independence from political pressures;
and the government’s ability to plan and
implement sound policies. Source:
World Bank Institute.
PO 00000
Frm 00134
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
60361
5. Rule of Law: An index of surveys
that rates countries on: The extent to
which the public has confidence in and
abides by the rules of society; the
incidence of violent and nonviolent
crime; the effectiveness, independence,
and predictability of the judiciary; and
the enforceability of contracts. Source:
World Bank Institute.
6. Control of Corruption: An index of
surveys that rates countries on: The
frequency of ‘‘additional payments to
get things done;’’ the effects of
corruption on the business
environment; ‘‘grand corruption’’ in the
political arena; and the tendency of
elites to engage in ‘‘state capture.’’
Source: World Bank Institute.
Encouraging Economic Freedom
1. Inflation: The most recent 12month change in consumer prices as
reported in the IMF’s International
Financial Statistics or in another public
forum by the relevant national monetary
authorities. Source: The International
Monetary Fund’s World Economic
Outlook (WEO) database.
2. Fiscal Policy: The overall budget
deficit divided by GDP, averaged over a
three-year period. The data for this
measure relies primarily on IMF country
reports with input from U.S. missions in
host countries, or is provided directly
by the recipient government where
public IMF data is outdated or
unavailable. All data is cross-checked
with the IMF’s World Economic
Outlook database to try to ensure
consistency across countries and made
publicly available. Source: International
Monetary Fund Country Reports,
National Governments, and the
International Monetary Fund’s World
Economic Outlook (WEO) database.
3. Business Start-Up: An index that
rates countries on the time and cost of
complying with all procedures officially
required for an entrepreneur to start up
and formally operate an industrial or
commercial business. Source:
International Finance Corporation.
4. Trade Policy: A measure of a
country’s openness to international
trade based on weighted average tariff
rates and non-tariff barriers to trade.
Source: The Heritage Foundation.
5. Regulatory Quality: An index of
surveys that rates countries on: The
burden of regulations on business; price
controls; the government’s role in the
economy; foreign investment regulation;
and many other areas. Source: World
Bank Institute.
6. Land Rights and Access: An index
that rates countries on: The extent to
which the institutional, legal, and
market framework provide secure land
tenure and equitable access to land in
E:\FR\FM\10OCN1.SGM
10OCN1
60362
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 198 / Friday, October 10, 2008 / Notices
rural areas and the time and cost of
property registration in urban and periurban areas. Source: The International
Fund for Agricultural Development
(IFAD) and the International Finance
Corporation.
Investing in People
1. Public Expenditure on Health:
Total expenditures on health by
government at all levels divided by
GDP. Source: The World Health
Organization (WHO).
2. Immunization Rates: The average of
DPT3 and measles immunization rates
for the most recent year available.
Source: The World Health Organization
(WHO).
3. Total Public Expenditure on
Primary Education: Total expenditures
on primary education by government at
all levels divided by GDP. Source: The
United Nations Educational, Scientific
and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)
and National Governments.
4. Girls’ Primary Completion Rate:
The number of female students enrolled
in the last grade of primary education
minus repeaters divided by the
population in the relevant age cohort.
Source: United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization
(UNESCO).
5. Natural Resource Management: An
index made up of four indicators: Ecoregion protection, access to improved
water, access to improved sanitation,
and child (ages 1–4) mortality. Source:
The Center for International Earth
Science Information Network (CIESIN)
and the Yale Center for Environmental
Law and Policy (YCLEP).
[FR Doc. E8–24206 Filed 10–9–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9211–03–P
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND
SPACE ADMINISTRATION
[Notice (08–077)]
Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel;
Meeting.
National Aeronautics and
Space Administration (NASA).
ACTION: Notice of Meeting; Correction.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
Federal Register Citation of
Previous Announcement: 73 FR 58668,
Notice Number 08–067, October 7, 2008.
SUMMARY: The National Aeronautics and
Space Administration published a
document in the Federal Register of
October 7, 2008, announcing a meeting
of the Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel
(ASAP). The document announced an
incorrect meeting time.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:11 Oct 09, 2008
Jkt 217001
Correction: Date and time of ASAP
meeting is Wednesday, October 23,
2008, 10 a.m. to 12 noon.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ms.
Kathy Dakon, Aerospace Safety
Advisory Panel Executive Director,
National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, Washington, DC 20546,
(202) 358–0732.
Dated: October 7, 2008.
P. Diane Rausch,
Advisory Committee Management Officer,
National Aeronautics and Space
Administration.
[FR Doc. E8–24244 Filed 10–9–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510–13–P
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
Advisory Committee for Mathematical
and Physical Sciences; Notice of
Meeting
In accordance with Federal Advisory
Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–463, as
amended), the National Science
Foundation announces the following
meeting:
Name: Advisory Committee for
Mathematical and Physical Sciences (66)
Date/Time: November 5, 2008 2 p.m.–4
p.m.; November 6, 2008 8 a.m.–6 p.m.;
November 7, 2008 8 a.m.–3 p.m.
Place: National Science Foundation, 4201
Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230,
November 5 Room 1005; November 6, Room
375; November 7, Room 1235.
Type of Meeting: Open.
Contact Person: Dr. Morris L. Aizenman,
Senior Science Associate, Directorate for
Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Room
1005, National Science Foundation, 4201
Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230.
(703) 292–8807.
Purpose of Meeting: To provide advice and
recommendations concerning NSF science
and education activities within the
Directorate for Mathematical and Physical
Sciences.
Agenda:
Briefing to new members about NSF and
Directorate (11/5).
Update on current status of Directorate.
Report of NSF Advisory Panel on Light
Source Facilities Subcommittee.
Meeting of MPSAC with Divisions within
MPS Directorate.
Discussion of MPS Long-term Planning
Activities.
Summary Minutes: May be obtained from
the contact person listed above.
Dated: October 6, 2008.
Susanne E. Bolton,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. E8–24067 Filed 10–9–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555–01–P
PO 00000
Frm 00135
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 52–027 and 52–028]
South Carolina Electric & Gas
Company, Acting for Itself and as
Agent for the South Carolina Public
Service Authority (Also Referred to as
Santee Cooper) Application for the
Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station Units
2 and 3; Notice of Order, Hearing, and
Opportunity To Petition for Leave To
Intervene
Pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of
1954, as amended, and the regulations
in Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR) Part 2, ‘‘Rules of
Practice for Domestic Licensing
Proceedings and Issuance of Orders,’’ 10
CFR Part 50, ‘‘Domestic Licensing of
Production and Utilization Facilities,’’
and 10 CFR Part 52, ‘‘Licenses,
Certifications, and Approvals for
Nuclear Power Plants,’’ notice is hereby
given that a hearing will be held, at a
time and place to be set in the future by
the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC, the Commission) or
designated by the Atomic Safety and
Licensing Board (Board). The hearing
will consider the application dated
March 27, 2008, filed by South Carolina
Electric & Gas Company (SCE&G), acting
for itself and as agent for South Carolina
Public Service Authority (also referred
to as Santee Cooper), pursuant to
Subpart C of 10 CFR Part 52, for a
combined license (COL). The
application requests approval of a COL
for the Virgil C. Summer Nuclear
Station (VCSNS) Units 2 and 3, to be
located in Fairfield County, South
Carolina. The application was accepted
for docketing on July 31, 2008 (August
6, 2008; 73 FR 45793). The docket
numbers established for this COL
application are 52–027 and 52–028. The
Summer COL application incorporates
by reference Appendix D to 10 CFR 52
(which includes the AP1000 design
through Revision 15), as amended by
the AP1000 Design Control Document
(DCD) submitted by Westinghouse as
Revision 16 and Westinghouse
Technical Report APP–GW–GLR–134,
Revision 4. By letter to Westinghouse
dated January 18, 2008, the staff
accepted DCD Revision 16 for
docketing. Proposed amendments to the
AP1000 certified design are subject of
an ongoing rulemaking under docket
number 52–006.
The hearing on the COL application
will be conducted by a Board that will
be designated by the Chairman of the
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
Panel or will be conducted by the
Commission. Notice as to the
E:\FR\FM\10OCN1.SGM
10OCN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 198 (Friday, October 10, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60359-60362]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-24206]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
MILLENNIUM CHALLENGE CORPORATION
[MCC FR 08-15]
Report on the Criteria and Methodology for Determining the
Eligibility of Candidate Countries for Millennium Challenge Account
Assistance in Fiscal Year 2009
AGENCY: Millennium Challenge Corporation.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This report to Congress is provided in accordance with section
608(b) of the Millennium Challenge Act of 2003, 22 U.S.C.A. 7701,
7707(b) (the ``Act'').
Dated: October 7, 2008.
Henry Pitney,
(Acting) Vice President and General Counsel, Millennium Challenge
Corporation.
Report on the Criteria and Methodology for Determining the Eligibility
of Candidate Countries for Millennium Challenge Account Assistance in
Fiscal Year 2009 Summary
This report to Congress is provided in accordance with section
608(b) of the Millennium Challenge Act of 2003, 22 U.S.C.A. 7701,
7707(b) (the Act).
The Act authorizes the provision of Millennium Challenge Account
(MCA) assistance to countries that enter into compacts with the United
States to support policies and programs that advance the prospects of
such countries achieving lasting economic growth and poverty reduction.
The Act requires the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) to take a
number of steps in determining the countries that, based on their
demonstrated commitment to just and democratic governance, economic
freedom and investing in their people, and the opportunity to reduce
poverty and generate economic growth in the country, will be eligible
for MCA assistance during fiscal year 2009 (FY09). These steps include
the submission of reports to the congressional committees specified in
the Act and the publication of notices in the Federal Register that
identify:
1. The countries that are ``candidate countries'' for MCA
assistance during FY09 based on their per-capita income levels and
their eligibility to receive assistance under U.S. law, and countries
that would be candidate countries but for specified legal prohibitions
on assistance (section 608(a) of the Act);
2. The criteria and methodology that the Board of Directors of MCC
(the Board) will use to measure and evaluate the relative policy
performance of the candidate countries consistent with the requirements
of section 607 of the Act in order to select ``MCA eligible countries''
from among the ``candidate countries'' (section 608(b) of the Act); and
3. The list of countries determined by the Board to be ``MCA
eligible countries'' for FY09, with justification for eligibility
determination and selection for compact negotiation, including which of
the MCA eligible countries the Board will seek to enter into MCA
compacts (section 608(d) of the Act).
This report sets out the criteria and methodology to be applied in
determining eligibility for new partner countries for FY09 MCA
assistance.
The Criteria and Methodology for FY09
MCC reviews all of its indicators and methodology annually to
ensure that the best measures are being used and, from time to time,
recommends changes or refinements if MCC identifies better
methodologies, better indicators, or improved sources of data. MCC
takes into account public comments received on the previous year's
criteria and methodology and consults with a broad range of experts in
the development community and within the U.S. Government.
MCC recommends no changes to the selection criteria and methodology
for this fiscal year.
Potential Future Changes
Since FY07, MCC has pursued research and consultation to explore
the possibility of adopting a new education indicator in the Investing
in People category. However, MCC was unable to identify an indicator
that would significantly strengthen the selection criteria in FY09. MCC
will continue to explore potential measures. Over the last fifteen
years, much attention has been focused on enrolling and keeping more
children in school, but not necessarily on enhancing the quality of
education. With the support of the World Bank, USAID, UNESCO, the Basic
Education Coalition, and others, efforts are currently underway to
develop cross-country measures of learning outcomes, educational
quality, and governments' commitment to improving educational quality.
However, these efforts are still under development and there are
currently no education quality indicators that are viable for MCC
purposes at this time. In assessing new indicators, MCC favors those
that: (1) Are developed by an independent third party; (2) utilize
objective and high quality data that rely upon an analytically rigorous
methodology; (3) are publicly available; (4) have broad country
coverage; (5) are comparable across countries; (6) have a clear
theoretical or empirical link to economic growth and poverty reduction;
(7) are policy linked (i.e., measure factors that governments can
influence within a two to three year horizon); and (8) have broad
consistency in results from year to year.
Many of MCC's candidate countries in the lower middle income
category have realized substantial success in achieving high levels of
performance on select Investing in People indicators. MCC will explore
options for alternative measures of an Investing in People policy
framework that do a better job of distinguishing among high performers
to incorporate in future fiscal years for the lower middle income
countries.
Several of MCC's early compacts are due to conclude within the next
two years. MCC will review whether the selection criteria and
methodology should be modified when applied to selecting a country as
eligible for a second compact.
Criteria and Methodology
The Board will select eligible countries based on the following,
among
[[Page 60360]]
other factors: (1) Their overall performance in relation to their
income-level peers in three broad policy categories--Ruling Justly,
Encouraging Economic Freedom, and Investing in People; (2) the
opportunity to reduce poverty and generate economic growth. Section 607
of the Act requires that the Board's determination of eligibility be
based ``to the maximum extent possible, upon objective and quantifiable
indicators of a country's demonstrated commitment'' to the criteria set
out in the Act. For FY09, there will be two groups of candidate
countries--low income countries and lower middle income countries. Low
income candidate countries refer to those countries that have a per
capita income equal to or less than $1,785 and are not ineligible to
receive United States economic assistance under part I of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961 by reason of the application of any provision of
the Foreign Assistance Act or any other provision of law. Lower middle
income candidate countries are those that have a per capita income
between $1,786 and $3,705 and are not ineligible to receive United
States economic assistance.
The Board will make use of seventeen indicators to assess policy
performance of individual countries (specific definitions of the
indicators and their sources are set out in annex A). These indicators
are grouped for purposes of the FY09 assessment methodology under the
three policy categories listed below.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Encouraging economic
Ruling justly freedom Investing in people
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Civil Liberties.......... 1. Inflation........ 1. Public
Expenditure on
Health.
2. Political Rights......... 2. Fiscal Policy.... 2. Public
Expenditure on
Primary Education.
3. Voice and Accountability. 3. Business Start-Up 3. Immunization
Rates (DPT3 and
Measles).
4. Government Effectiveness. 4. Trade Policy..... 4. Girls' Primary
Education
Completion.
5. Rule of Law.............. 5. Regulatory 5. Natural Resource
Quality. Management.
6. Control of Corruption.... 6. Land Rights and
Access.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In making its determination of eligibility with respect to a
particular candidate country, the Board will consider whether a country
performs above the median in relation to its peers on at least half of
the indicators in the Ruling Justly and Economic Freedom categories,
above the median on at least three of the five indicators in the
Investing in People category, and above the median on the Control of
Corruption indicator. One exception to this methodology is that the
median is not used for the Inflation indicator. Instead, to pass the
Inflation indicator a country's inflation rate needs to be under a
fixed ceiling of 15 percent. The Board will also take into
consideration whether a country performs substantially below the median
on any indicator (i.e., in the bottom 25th percentile) and has not
taken appropriate measures to address this shortcoming. The indicator
methodology will be the predominant basis for determining which
countries will be eligible for MCA assistance. In addition, the Board
may exercise discretion in evaluating performance on the indicators and
determining a final list of eligible countries.
Where necessary, the Board may also take into account other
quantitative and qualitative information (supplemental information) to
determine whether a country performed satisfactorily in relation to its
peers in a given category. There are elements of the criteria set out
in the Act for which there is either limited quantitative information
(e.g., rights of people with disabilities) or no well-developed
performance indicator. Until such data and/or indicators are developed,
the Board may rely on additional data and qualitative information to
assess policy performance. The Board may also consider whether any
adjustments should be made for data gaps, lags, trends, or other
weaknesses in particular indicators. For example, the State Department
Human Rights Report contains qualitative information to make an
assessment on a variety of criteria outlined by Congress, such as the
rights of people with disabilities, the treatment of women and
children, workers rights, and human rights. Similarly, as additional
information in the area of corruption, the Board may consider how a
country scores on Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions
Index and the Global Integrity Index, as well as on the defined
indicator.
Compact eligible partners are expected to seek to maintain and
improve policy performance. MCC recognizes that partner countries may
not meet the formal eligibility criteria from time to time due to a
number of factors, such as changes in the peer-group median; graduation
into a new income category (e.g., from low income to lower middle
income); numerical declines that are within the margin of error; slight
declines in policy performance; revisions or corrections of data; the
introduction of new sub-data sources; or changes in the indicators used
to measure performance. None of these factors alone warrants suspension
or termination of eligibility and/or assistance. Countries that
demonstrate a significant policy reversal can face a warning,
suspension, or termination of eligibility and/or assistance. According
to MCC's authorizing legislation, ``[a]fter consultation with the
Board, the Chief Executive Officer may suspend or terminate assistance
in whole or in part for a country or entity * * * if * * * the country
or entity has engaged in a pattern of actions inconsistent with the
criteria used to determine the eligibility of the country or entity * *
*.'' Given data lags, this pattern of behavior need not be captured in
the indicators for MCC to take action. [See MCC's Policy on Suspension
and Termination]
As provided in the Act, following the determination of eligible
countries, the Chief Executive Officer's Report to Congress will set
out the list of eligible countries, identify with which of those
countries MCC will seek to enter into compact negotiations, and include
a justification for such eligibility determinations and selections for
compact negotiation.
Relationship to Legislative Criteria
Within each policy category, the Act sets out a number of specific
selection criteria. As indicated above, a set of objective and
quantifiable policy indicators is used to establish eligibility for MCA
assistance and measure the relative performance by candidate countries
against these criteria. The Board's approach to determining eligibility
ensures that performance against each of these criteria is assessed by
at least one of the seventeen objective indicators. Most are addressed
by multiple indicators. The specific indicators used to measure each of
the criteria set out in the Act are listed below.
Section 607(b)(1): Just and democratic governance, including a
demonstrated commitment to:
[[Page 60361]]
(a) Promote political pluralism, equality and the rule of law;
Indicators--Political Rights, Civil Liberties, Voice and
Accountability, and Rule of Law
(b) Respect human and civil rights, including the rights of people
with disabilities;
Indicators--Political Rights, Civil Liberties, and Voice and
Accountability
(c) Protect private property rights;
Indicators--Civil Liberties, Regulatory Quality, Rule of Law, and Land
Rights and Access
(d) Encourage transparency and accountability of government; and
Indicators--Political Rights, Civil Liberties, Voice and
Accountability, Control of Corruption, Rule of Law, and Government
Effectiveness
(e) Combat corruption;
Indicators--Civil Liberties, Rule of Law, and Control of Corruption
Section 607(b)(2): Economic freedom, including a demonstrated
commitment to economic policies that:
(a) Encourage citizens and firms to participate in global trade and
international capital markets;
Indicators--Fiscal Policy, Inflation, Trade Policy, Business Start-Up,
and Regulatory Quality
(b) Promote private sector growth and the sustainable management of
natural resources;
Indicators--Inflation, Business Start-Up, Fiscal Policy, Land Rights
and Access, Natural
(c) Resource Management, and Regulatory Quality strengthen market
forces in the economy; and
Indicators--Fiscal Policy, Inflation, Trade Policy, Business Start-Up,
Land Rights and Access, and Regulatory Quality
(d) Respect worker rights, including the right to form labor
unions;
Indicators--Civil Liberties and Voice and Accountability
Section 607(b)(3): Investments in the people of such country,
particularly women and children, including programs that (A) promote
broad-based primary education and (B) strengthen and build capacity to
provide quality public health and reduce child mortality.
Indicators--Girls' Primary Education Completion, Public Expenditure on
Primary Education, Immunization Rates, Public Expenditure on Health,
and Natural Resource Management
Where necessary the Board will also draw on supplemental data and
qualitative information, including the State Department's Human Rights
Report, Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index, and
the Global Integrity Index.
Annex A to Report: Indicator Definitions
The following 17 indicators will be used to measure candidate
countries' demonstrated commitment to the criteria found in section
607(b) of the Act. The indicators are intended to assess the degree to
which the political and economic conditions in a country serve to
promote broad-based sustainable economic growth and reduction of
poverty; and thus provide a sound environment for the use of MCA funds.
The indicators are not goals in themselves; rather they measure
policies that are linked to broad-based sustainable economic growth.
The indicators were selected based on their relationship to economic
growth and poverty reduction, the number of countries they cover, their
transparency and availability, and their relative soundness and
objectivity. Where possible, the indicators are developed by
independent sources.
Ruling Justly
1. Civil Liberties: A panel of independent experts rates countries
on: Freedom of expression; association and organizational rights; rule
of law and human rights; and personal autonomy and economic rights.
Source: Freedom House.
2. Political Rights: A panel of independent experts rates countries
on: The prevalence of free and fair elections of officials with real
power; the ability of citizens to form political parties that may
compete fairly in elections; freedom from domination by the military,
foreign powers, totalitarian parties, religious hierarchies and
economic oligarchies; and the political rights of minority groups.
Source: Freedom House.
3. Voice and Accountability: An index of surveys that rates
countries on: The ability of institutions to protect civil liberties;
the extent to which citizens of a country are able to participate in
the selection of governments; and the independence of the media.
Source: World Bank Institute.
4. Government Effectiveness: An index of surveys that rates
countries on: The quality of public service provision; civil servants'
competency and independence from political pressures; and the
government's ability to plan and implement sound policies. Source:
World Bank Institute.
5. Rule of Law: An index of surveys that rates countries on: The
extent to which the public has confidence in and abides by the rules of
society; the incidence of violent and nonviolent crime; the
effectiveness, independence, and predictability of the judiciary; and
the enforceability of contracts. Source: World Bank Institute.
6. Control of Corruption: An index of surveys that rates countries
on: The frequency of ``additional payments to get things done;'' the
effects of corruption on the business environment; ``grand corruption''
in the political arena; and the tendency of elites to engage in ``state
capture.'' Source: World Bank Institute.
Encouraging Economic Freedom
1. Inflation: The most recent 12-month change in consumer prices as
reported in the IMF's International Financial Statistics or in another
public forum by the relevant national monetary authorities. Source: The
International Monetary Fund's World Economic Outlook (WEO) database.
2. Fiscal Policy: The overall budget deficit divided by GDP,
averaged over a three-year period. The data for this measure relies
primarily on IMF country reports with input from U.S. missions in host
countries, or is provided directly by the recipient government where
public IMF data is outdated or unavailable. All data is cross-checked
with the IMF's World Economic Outlook database to try to ensure
consistency across countries and made publicly available. Source:
International Monetary Fund Country Reports, National Governments, and
the International Monetary Fund's World Economic Outlook (WEO)
database.
3. Business Start-Up: An index that rates countries on the time and
cost of complying with all procedures officially required for an
entrepreneur to start up and formally operate an industrial or
commercial business. Source: International Finance Corporation.
4. Trade Policy: A measure of a country's openness to international
trade based on weighted average tariff rates and non-tariff barriers to
trade. Source: The Heritage Foundation.
5. Regulatory Quality: An index of surveys that rates countries on:
The burden of regulations on business; price controls; the government's
role in the economy; foreign investment regulation; and many other
areas. Source: World Bank Institute.
6. Land Rights and Access: An index that rates countries on: The
extent to which the institutional, legal, and market framework provide
secure land tenure and equitable access to land in
[[Page 60362]]
rural areas and the time and cost of property registration in urban and
peri-urban areas. Source: The International Fund for Agricultural
Development (IFAD) and the International Finance Corporation.
Investing in People
1. Public Expenditure on Health: Total expenditures on health by
government at all levels divided by GDP. Source: The World Health
Organization (WHO).
2. Immunization Rates: The average of DPT3 and measles immunization
rates for the most recent year available. Source: The World Health
Organization (WHO).
3. Total Public Expenditure on Primary Education: Total
expenditures on primary education by government at all levels divided
by GDP. Source: The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organization (UNESCO) and National Governments.
4. Girls' Primary Completion Rate: The number of female students
enrolled in the last grade of primary education minus repeaters divided
by the population in the relevant age cohort. Source: United Nations
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).
5. Natural Resource Management: An index made up of four
indicators: Eco-region protection, access to improved water, access to
improved sanitation, and child (ages 1-4) mortality. Source: The Center
for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN) and the
Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy (YCLEP).
[FR Doc. E8-24206 Filed 10-9-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9211-03-P
