Request for Information on How To Structure Proposed New Program: Advanced Manufacturing Technology Consortia (AMTech), 43983-43985 [2011-18580]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Notices
instruct CBP to liquidate, without regard
to antidumping duties, all entries of
subject merchandise during the POR for
which the importer-specific assessment
rate is zero or de minimis. The
Department intends to issue assessment
instructions to CBP 15 days after the
date of publication of the final results of
this review.
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit
requirements will be effective upon
publication of these final results of
administrative review for all shipments
of the subject merchandise entered, or
withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after the publication
date, as provided for by section
751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For the
exporter listed above, the cash deposit
rate will be the rate established in the
final results of this review (except, if the
rate is zero or de minimis, i.e., less than
0.5 percent, no cash deposit will be
required for that company); (2) for
previously investigated or reviewed PRC
and non-PRC exporters not listed above
that have separate rates, the cash
deposit rate will continue to be the
exporter-specific rate published for the
most recent period; (3) for all PRC
exporters of subject merchandise which
have not been found to be entitled to a
separate rate, the cash deposit rate will
be the PRC-wide rate of 55.21 percent;
and (4) for all non-PRC exporters of
subject merchandise which have not
received their own rate, the cash deposit
rate will be the rate applicable to the
PRC exporters that supplied that nonPRC exporter. These deposit
requirements, when imposed, shall
remain in effect until further notice.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Reimbursement of Duties
This notice also serves as a final
reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)
to file a certificate regarding the
reimbursement of antidumping duties
prior to liquidation of the relevant
entries during this POR. Failure to
comply with this requirement could
result in the Department’s presumption
that reimbursement of antidumping
duties has occurred and the subsequent
assessment of doubled antidumping
duties.
Administrative Protective Orders
This notice also serves as a reminder
to parties subject to administrative
protective order (‘‘APO’’) of their
responsibility concerning the return or
destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues
to govern business proprietary
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:59 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
information in this segment of the
proceeding. Timely written notification
of the return/destruction of APO
materials or conversion to judicial
protective order is hereby requested.
Failure to comply with the regulations
and terms of an APO is a violation
which is subject to sanction.
Disclosure
The Department will disclose the
calculations performed in these final
results within five days of the date of
public announcement of the final results
to parties in this proceeding in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).
The Department is issuing and
publishing this administrative review
and notice in accordance with sections
751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act.
Dated: July 14, 2011.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
Appendix I—Issues & Decision
Memorandum
Issues
Comment 1: The Reported Input Quantity
of Steel.
Comment 2: The Reported Scrap Offset.
[FR Doc. 2011–18570 Filed 7–21–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Institute of Standards and
Technology
[Docket No.: 110620345–1331–02]
Request for Information on How To
Structure Proposed New Program:
Advanced Manufacturing Technology
Consortia (AMTech)
National Institute of Standards
and Technology (NIST), Department of
Commerce.
ACTION: Request for information.
AGENCY:
The National Institute of
Standards and Technology (NIST)
invites interested parties to provide
input on how to best structure a new
public-private partnership program, the
Advanced Manufacturing Technology
Consortia (AMTech) program, proposed
in the NIST fiscal year (FY) 2012 budget
(see https://www.osec.doc.gov/bmi/
budget/12CJ/2012_NIST_&_NTIS_Cong_
Budget.pdf pp. NIST–250 to NIST–254)
for a copy of the AMTech budget
justification). As envisioned, the
AMTech program will provide Federal
financial assistance to leverage existing
or newly created industry-led consortia
to develop precompetitive enabling
manufacturing technologies. These
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
43983
consortia would develop roadmaps of
critical long-term industrial
manufacturing research needs, and issue
subawards to fund research by
universities, government laboratories,
and U.S. businesses. This initiative will
support research and development
(R&D) in advanced manufacturing, with
the goal of strengthening long-term U.S.
leadership in the development of
critical technologies that lead to
sustainable economic growth and job
creation.
Comments are due on or before
11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on September
20, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Comments will be accepted
by e-mail only. Comments must be sent
to AMTechRFC@nist.gov with the
subject line ‘‘AMTech Comments.’’
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Barbara Lambis, 301–975–4447,
barbara.lambis@nist.gov, or Michael D.
Walsh, 301–975–5545,
michael.walsh@nist.gov.
DATES:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
U.S. R&D intensity is lagging that of
other nations and the composition of
industrial R&D has shifted toward shortterm research. These trends leave
industry’s long-term needs unmet and
ultimately undermine our Nation’s
competitiveness.
As part of the Administration’s effort
to address this problem, the AMTech
program aims to support early stage
technology development by
incentivizing the formation of and
providing resources to industry-led
consortia that will support
precompetitive and enabling technology
development, and create the
infrastructure necessary for more
efficient transfer of technology.
By convening key players across the
entire innovation lifecycle, AMTech
consortia will work toward eliminating
critical barriers to innovation,
increasing the efficiency of domestic
innovation efforts and collapsing the
time scale to deliver new products and
services based on scientific and
technological advances. This strategy
has the potential to drive economic
growth, enhance competitiveness and
spur the creation of jobs in high-value
sectors of the U.S. economy.
The establishment of industry-led
AMTech consortia is expected to create
an R&D infrastructure for industrygovernment partnerships that span the
innovation life cycle—from discovery to
invention to commercialization. The
R&D-efficiency dimensions of these
consortia will help accelerate the
transition of knowledge and technology
among all of the partners and thereby
E:\FR\FM\22JYN1.SGM
22JYN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
43984
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Notices
shorten critical R&D-cycle times. Each
consortium will define and prioritize
the precompetitive R&D gaps and needs
that are most likely to accelerate the
development and diffusion of new
platform technologies with
commercialization potential to industry.
Where possible, consortia will utilize
existing R&D roadmaps to guide the
prioritization of R&D efforts. Where
well-defined technology roadmaps are
absent, it will be an initial mission of
AMTech consortia to facilitate,
coordinate, and develop appropriate
mechanisms for strategic planning based
on the input of the private sector and
academia. It is expected that the
development of well-defined and
articulated industry-led research plans
and priorities will provide academia
and government partners with valuable
insights into a research agenda most
likely to achieve high rates of
technological innovation.
The goals of AMTech include:
• Promoting collective efforts that
enable the development of key
technology platforms and technical
infrastructures;
• Improving the management of
research portfolios in response to
industry long-run technology
development needs;
• Providing an environment for
maximizing the leverage of Federal
investment through cost-sharing;
• Increasing industrial R&D
investment in enabling technology
platforms and infrastructure;
• Collapsing the time scale of
technological innovation;
• Fostering a robust U.S. innovation
system through broad participation by
industry, the Federal government,
universities, and state, local and tribal
governments; and
• Expanding the domestic valueadded from new technologies by
encouraging supply-chain integration,
thereby encouraging domestic
investment in multiple industries that
support these technologies.
AMTech expects to achieve these
goals through:
1. Coordination and advance
planning, by:
• Partnering with industry, academia,
and government to develop a shared
vision of an industry sector’s research
needs via a technology roadmap;
• Identifying shared technology
challenges that are solved with
precompetitive technologies; and
• Forming of industry-led consortia.
2. Research and knowledge transfer,
by:
• Promoting technology and
knowledge transfer by connecting
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:59 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
research to industry needs as defined by
the consortia;
• Funding precompetitive research
directed at meeting industry needs for
new technology platforms, derived from
consortia roadmaps; and
• Using consortia mechanisms (e.g.,
cross-company (horizontal) interactions)
to facilitate transfer of precompetitive
technology platforms.
3. Transition new technology to
commercial products, by:
• Providing a framework (e.g., an
industry cluster model) that facilitates
regional government and venture capital
support, enabling a clear path to
commercialization for the entire supply
chain;
• Developing regional cluster
synergies that encourage supply-chain
formation and effective integration; and
• Enabling commercial technologies
by removing production barriers
identified by the consortia.
Request for Information: The objective
of this request for information is to
assist NIST in the development of the
new AMTech program should NIST
receive FY 2012 appropriated funds for
this purpose. In this connection, the
questions below are intended to assist in
the formulation of comments, and
should not be construed as a limitation
on the number of comments that
interested persons may submit or as a
limitation on the issues that may be
addressed in such comments.
Comments containing references,
studies, research, and other empirical
data that are not widely published
should include copies of the referenced
materials. All comments will be made
publicly available. NIST is specifically
interested in receiving input pertaining
to one or more of the following
questions:
1. Should AMTech consortia focus on
developments within a single existing or
prospective industry, or should its focus
be on broader system developments that
must be supplied by multiple
industries?
2. Who should be eligible to
participate as a member of an AMTech
consortium? For example, U.S.
companies. i.e., large, medium, and/or
small; institutions of higher education;
Federal agencies; state, local, and tribal
governments; and non-profit
organizations?
3. Should AMTech place restrictions
on or limit consortium membership?
4. Who should be eligible to receive
research funding from an AMTech
consortium? For example, U.S.
companies i.e., large, medium, and/or
small; institutions of higher education;
Federal agencies; state, local, and tribal
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
governments; and non-profit
organizations?
5. What criteria should be used in
evaluating proposals for AMTech
funding?
6. What types of activities are suitable
for consortia funding?
7. Should conditions be placed on
research awards to ensure funded
activities are directed toward assisting
manufacturing in the U.S.?
8. What are ways to facilitate the
involvement of small businesses in
AMTech consortia?
9. What are best practices for
facilitating the widest dissemination
and adoption of knowledge and
technology through consortia?
10. While it is expected that the
research efforts of AMTech consortia
(including participants from the
Federal, academic, and private industry
sectors) will take place largely at the
pre-competitive stage in the
development of technologies, the
generation of intellectual property is
possible, and even likely. What types of
intellectual property arrangements
would promote active engagement of
industry in consortia that include the
funding of university-based research
and ensure that consortia efforts are
realized by U.S. manufacturers?
11. Would planning grants provide
sufficient incentive for industry to
develop roadmaps and initiate the
formation of consortia? If not, what
other incentives should be considered?
12. Should each member of an
AMTech consortium be required to
provide cost sharing? If so, what
percentage of cost sharing should be
provided?
13. What criteria should be used in
evaluating research proposals submitted
to an AMTech consortium?
14. What management models are best
suited for industry-led consortia?
15. Should the evaluation criteria
include the assessment of leadership
and managerial skills?
16. Should limitations be placed on
the duration of consortia?
17. How should an AMTech
consortium’s performance and impact
be evaluated? What are appropriate
measures of success?
18. What are the problems of
measuring real-time performance of
individual research awards issued by an
industry-led consortium? What are
appropriate measures of success?
19. How should the NIST AMTech
program be evaluated?
20. What are lessons learned from
other successful and unsuccessful
industry-led consortia?
21. How can AMTech do the most
with available resources? Are there
E:\FR\FM\22JYN1.SGM
22JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Notices
approaches that will best leverage the
Federal investment?
22. How should AMTech interact
with other Federal programs or
agencies?
23. What role can AMTech play in
developing, leading, or leveraging
consortia involving other Federal
agencies?
Dated: July 19, 2011.
Patrick Gallagher,
Under Secretary of Commerce for Standards
and Technology and Director.
[FR Doc. 2011–18580 Filed 7–21–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–13–P
Information or otherwise sensitive or
protected information.
NMFS will accept anonymous
comments (enter N/A in the required
fields, if you wish to remain
anonymous). You may submit
attachments to electronic comments in
Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or
Adobe PDF file formats only.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Shannon Bettridge (301–427–8437),
e-mail Shannon.Bettridge@noaa.gov or
Larissa Plants (301–427–8471),
e-mail Larissa.Plants@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XX37
Endangered and Threatened Species;
Recovery Plan for the Sei Whale
National Marine Fisheries
Service, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration,
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of availability; request
for comments.
AGENCY:
The National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) announces the
availability for public review of the draft
Recovery Plan (Plan) for the sei whale
(Balaenoptera borealis). NMFS is
soliciting review and comment from the
public and all interested parties on the
Plan, and will consider all substantive
comments received during the review
period before submitting the Plan for
final approval.
DATES: Comments on the draft Plan
must be received by close of business on
September 6, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by [0648– XX37], by any of
the following methods:
Electronic Submissions: Submit all
electronic public comments via the
Federal eRulemaking Portal https://
www.regulations.gov.
Mail: Angela Somma, National Marine
Fisheries Service, Office of Protected
Resources, Endangered Species
Division, 1325 East-West Highway,
Silver Spring, MD 20910.
Instructions: All comments received
are a part of the public record and will
generally be posted to https://
www.regulations.gov without change.
All Personal Identifying Information (for
example, name, address, etc.)
voluntarily submitted by the commenter
may be publicly accessible. Do not
submit Confidential Business
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:59 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
Recovery plans describe actions
beneficial to the conservation and
recovery of species listed under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA),
as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Section 4(f)(1) of the ESA requires that
recovery plans incorporate: (1)
Objective, measurable criteria which,
when met, would result in a
determination that the species is no
longer threatened or endangered; (2)
site-specific management actions
necessary to achieve the Plan’s goals;
and (3) estimates of the time required
and costs to implement recovery
actions. The ESA requires the
development of recovery plans for each
listed species unless such a plan would
not promote its recovery.
The sei whale has been listed as
‘‘endangered’’ under the Endangered
Species Act (ESA) since its passage in
1973. Sei whales are widely distributed
in the world’s oceans and most
populations were reduced, some of
them considerably, by extensive
commercial whaling in the 1950s
through the early 1970s. They were
hunted by modern whalers primarily
after the preferred larger (or more easily
taken) baleen whale species had been
seriously depleted, including the right
(Eubalaena spp.), humpback (Megaptera
novaeangliae), gray (Eschrichtius
robustus), blue (Balaenoptera
musculus), and fin (Balaenoptera
physalus) whales. International
protection for this species only began in
the 1970s, but the taking of sei whales
continued at relatively low levels by
Icelandic and Japanese operations. Of
the commercially exploited ‘‘great
whales,’’ the sei whale is one of the least
well studied, and the current status of
most sei whale stocks is poorly known.
Sei whales have a global distribution
and can be found in the North Atlantic
Ocean, North Pacific Ocean, and
Southern Hemisphere. Currently, the
population structure of sei whales has
not been adequately defined.
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
43985
Because the current status of sei
whales is unknown, the primary
purpose of the draft Recovery Plan is to
provide a research strategy to obtain
data necessary to estimate population
abundance, trends, and structure and to
identify factors that may be limiting sei
whale recovery. The draft Recovery Plan
incorporates an adaptive management
strategy that divides recovery actions
into three tiers. Tier I includes: (1)
Continued international regulation of
whaling; (2) determining population
size, trends, and structure using
opportunistic data collection in
conjunction with passive acoustic
monitoring, if determined to be feasible;
and (3) continued stranding response
and associated data collection. After ten
years of conducting Tier I actions,
NMFS expects to evaluate this approach
to determine if the approach is
providing sufficient demographic data
to assess recovery (or if more efficient
data collection methods become
available). If the Tier I method proves to
be sufficient, NMFS will continue Tier
I data collection activities. If Tier I data
collection methods are insufficient,
NMFS will consider Tier II actions,
building upon research conducted
during Tier I. Tier II adds more
extensive directed demographic survey
research and actions that are dependent
upon acquiring comprehensive
information (e.g., assessment of threats
currently ranked as unknown). Tier III
recovery actions depend upon data
collected in Tiers I and/or II. When
sufficient data are obtained, Tier III
recovery activities will be undertaken as
feasible. Costs have been estimated for
Tier I recovery actions only.
Criteria for the reclassification of the
sei whale are included in the final
Recovery Plan. In summary, the sei
whale may be reclassified from
endangered to threatened when all of
the following have been met: (1) Given
current and projected threats and
environmental conditions, the sei whale
population in each ocean basin in
which it occurs (Atlantic Ocean, Pacific
Ocean, and Southern Hemisphere)
satisfies the risk analysis standard for
threatened status (has no more than a 1
percent chance of extinction in 100
years) and the global population has at
least 1,500 mature, reproductive
individuals (consisting of at least 250
mature females and at least 250 mature
males in each ocean basin). Mature is
defined as the number of individuals
known, estimated, or inferred to be
capable of reproduction. Any factors or
circumstances that are thought to
substantially contribute to a real risk of
extinction that cannot be incorporated
E:\FR\FM\22JYN1.SGM
22JYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 141 (Friday, July 22, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43983-43985]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-18580]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Institute of Standards and Technology
[Docket No.: 110620345-1331-02]
Request for Information on How To Structure Proposed New Program:
Advanced Manufacturing Technology Consortia (AMTech)
AGENCY: National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST),
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Request for information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
invites interested parties to provide input on how to best structure a
new public-private partnership program, the Advanced Manufacturing
Technology Consortia (AMTech) program, proposed in the NIST fiscal year
(FY) 2012 budget (see https://www.osec.doc.gov/bmi/budget/12CJ/2012_NIST_&_NTIS_Cong_Budget.pdf pp. NIST-250 to NIST-254) for a copy of
the AMTech budget justification). As envisioned, the AMTech program
will provide Federal financial assistance to leverage existing or newly
created industry-led consortia to develop precompetitive enabling
manufacturing technologies. These consortia would develop roadmaps of
critical long-term industrial manufacturing research needs, and issue
subawards to fund research by universities, government laboratories,
and U.S. businesses. This initiative will support research and
development (R&D) in advanced manufacturing, with the goal of
strengthening long-term U.S. leadership in the development of critical
technologies that lead to sustainable economic growth and job creation.
DATES: Comments are due on or before 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on
September 20, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Comments will be accepted by e-mail only. Comments must be
sent to AMTechRFC@nist.gov with the subject line ``AMTech Comments.''
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara Lambis, 301-975-4447,
barbara.lambis@nist.gov, or Michael D. Walsh, 301-975-5545,
michael.walsh@nist.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
U.S. R&D intensity is lagging that of other nations and the
composition of industrial R&D has shifted toward short-term research.
These trends leave industry's long-term needs unmet and ultimately
undermine our Nation's competitiveness.
As part of the Administration's effort to address this problem, the
AMTech program aims to support early stage technology development by
incentivizing the formation of and providing resources to industry-led
consortia that will support precompetitive and enabling technology
development, and create the infrastructure necessary for more efficient
transfer of technology.
By convening key players across the entire innovation lifecycle,
AMTech consortia will work toward eliminating critical barriers to
innovation, increasing the efficiency of domestic innovation efforts
and collapsing the time scale to deliver new products and services
based on scientific and technological advances. This strategy has the
potential to drive economic growth, enhance competitiveness and spur
the creation of jobs in high-value sectors of the U.S. economy.
The establishment of industry-led AMTech consortia is expected to
create an R&D infrastructure for industry-government partnerships that
span the innovation life cycle--from discovery to invention to
commercialization. The R&D-efficiency dimensions of these consortia
will help accelerate the transition of knowledge and technology among
all of the partners and thereby
[[Page 43984]]
shorten critical R&D-cycle times. Each consortium will define and
prioritize the precompetitive R&D gaps and needs that are most likely
to accelerate the development and diffusion of new platform
technologies with commercialization potential to industry. Where
possible, consortia will utilize existing R&D roadmaps to guide the
prioritization of R&D efforts. Where well-defined technology roadmaps
are absent, it will be an initial mission of AMTech consortia to
facilitate, coordinate, and develop appropriate mechanisms for
strategic planning based on the input of the private sector and
academia. It is expected that the development of well-defined and
articulated industry-led research plans and priorities will provide
academia and government partners with valuable insights into a research
agenda most likely to achieve high rates of technological innovation.
The goals of AMTech include:
Promoting collective efforts that enable the development
of key technology platforms and technical infrastructures;
Improving the management of research portfolios in
response to industry long-run technology development needs;
Providing an environment for maximizing the leverage of
Federal investment through cost-sharing;
Increasing industrial R&D investment in enabling
technology platforms and infrastructure;
Collapsing the time scale of technological innovation;
Fostering a robust U.S. innovation system through broad
participation by industry, the Federal government, universities, and
state, local and tribal governments; and
Expanding the domestic value-added from new technologies
by encouraging supply-chain integration, thereby encouraging domestic
investment in multiple industries that support these technologies.
AMTech expects to achieve these goals through:
1. Coordination and advance planning, by:
Partnering with industry, academia, and government to
develop a shared vision of an industry sector's research needs via a
technology roadmap;
Identifying shared technology challenges that are solved
with precompetitive technologies; and
Forming of industry-led consortia.
2. Research and knowledge transfer, by:
Promoting technology and knowledge transfer by connecting
research to industry needs as defined by the consortia;
Funding precompetitive research directed at meeting
industry needs for new technology platforms, derived from consortia
roadmaps; and
Using consortia mechanisms (e.g., cross-company
(horizontal) interactions) to facilitate transfer of precompetitive
technology platforms.
3. Transition new technology to commercial products, by:
Providing a framework (e.g., an industry cluster model)
that facilitates regional government and venture capital support,
enabling a clear path to commercialization for the entire supply chain;
Developing regional cluster synergies that encourage
supply-chain formation and effective integration; and
Enabling commercial technologies by removing production
barriers identified by the consortia.
Request for Information: The objective of this request for
information is to assist NIST in the development of the new AMTech
program should NIST receive FY 2012 appropriated funds for this
purpose. In this connection, the questions below are intended to assist
in the formulation of comments, and should not be construed as a
limitation on the number of comments that interested persons may submit
or as a limitation on the issues that may be addressed in such
comments. Comments containing references, studies, research, and other
empirical data that are not widely published should include copies of
the referenced materials. All comments will be made publicly available.
NIST is specifically interested in receiving input pertaining to one or
more of the following questions:
1. Should AMTech consortia focus on developments within a single
existing or prospective industry, or should its focus be on broader
system developments that must be supplied by multiple industries?
2. Who should be eligible to participate as a member of an AMTech
consortium? For example, U.S. companies. i.e., large, medium, and/or
small; institutions of higher education; Federal agencies; state,
local, and tribal governments; and non-profit organizations?
3. Should AMTech place restrictions on or limit consortium
membership?
4. Who should be eligible to receive research funding from an
AMTech consortium? For example, U.S. companies i.e., large, medium,
and/or small; institutions of higher education; Federal agencies;
state, local, and tribal governments; and non-profit organizations?
5. What criteria should be used in evaluating proposals for AMTech
funding?
6. What types of activities are suitable for consortia funding?
7. Should conditions be placed on research awards to ensure funded
activities are directed toward assisting manufacturing in the U.S.?
8. What are ways to facilitate the involvement of small businesses
in AMTech consortia?
9. What are best practices for facilitating the widest
dissemination and adoption of knowledge and technology through
consortia?
10. While it is expected that the research efforts of AMTech
consortia (including participants from the Federal, academic, and
private industry sectors) will take place largely at the pre-
competitive stage in the development of technologies, the generation of
intellectual property is possible, and even likely. What types of
intellectual property arrangements would promote active engagement of
industry in consortia that include the funding of university-based
research and ensure that consortia efforts are realized by U.S.
manufacturers?
11. Would planning grants provide sufficient incentive for industry
to develop roadmaps and initiate the formation of consortia? If not,
what other incentives should be considered?
12. Should each member of an AMTech consortium be required to
provide cost sharing? If so, what percentage of cost sharing should be
provided?
13. What criteria should be used in evaluating research proposals
submitted to an AMTech consortium?
14. What management models are best suited for industry-led
consortia?
15. Should the evaluation criteria include the assessment of
leadership and managerial skills?
16. Should limitations be placed on the duration of consortia?
17. How should an AMTech consortium's performance and impact be
evaluated? What are appropriate measures of success?
18. What are the problems of measuring real-time performance of
individual research awards issued by an industry-led consortium? What
are appropriate measures of success?
19. How should the NIST AMTech program be evaluated?
20. What are lessons learned from other successful and unsuccessful
industry-led consortia?
21. How can AMTech do the most with available resources? Are there
[[Page 43985]]
approaches that will best leverage the Federal investment?
22. How should AMTech interact with other Federal programs or
agencies?
23. What role can AMTech play in developing, leading, or leveraging
consortia involving other Federal agencies?
Dated: July 19, 2011.
Patrick Gallagher,
Under Secretary of Commerce for Standards and Technology and Director.
[FR Doc. 2011-18580 Filed 7-21-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-13-P
