Request for Information Regarding Manufacturing USA Institutes and Processes, 11344-11346 [2020-03896]
Download as PDF
11344
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 39 / Thursday, February 27, 2020 / Notices
Dated: February 21, 2020.
James Maeder,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping
and Countervailing Duty Operations.
[FR Doc. 2020–04006 Filed 2–26–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Institute of Standards and
Technology
[Docket Number: 200213–0056]
Request for Information Regarding
Manufacturing USA Institutes and
Processes
National Institute of Standards
and Technology, Department of
Commerce.
ACTION: Request for Information (RFI).
AGENCY:
The Manufacturing USA
reauthorization prescribes three
pathways for creating centers for
manufacturing innovation or institutes
in the Manufacturing USA network.
Through this Request for Information
(RFI), NIST is seeking comment from
the public on the pathway where
manufacturing centers outside of
Manufacturing USA are recognized by
the Secretary of Commerce as centers for
manufacturing innovation in response
to a formal request by the centers for
such recognition. The law provides that
a manufacturing center substantially
similar to Manufacturing USA
institutes, but which do not have federal
sponsorship, may be recognized for
participation in the network, but does
not specify criteria for similarity. This
pathway may be termed the ‘‘alliance’’
model for membership in
Manufacturing USA. These could be
existing agency-sponsored institutes
which are no longer under a federal
financial aid agreement or existing
entities not in the network with relevant
characteristics that are new to the
network. Through this RFI, NIST also is
seeking broad input and participation
from stakeholders to assist in
identifying and prioritizing issues and
proposed solutions on the information
provided regarding the proposed
‘‘alliance’’ path to designate a
Manufacturing USA Institute, including
what should be the minimum
characteristics and requirements for
such entities.
DATES: Comments must be received by
5:00 p.m. Eastern time on August 25,
2020. Written comments in response to
the RFI should be submitted according
to the instructions in the ADDRESSES and
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION sections
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Feb 26, 2020
Jkt 250001
below. Submissions received after that
date may not be considered.
ADDRESSES:
For Comments:
Responses can be submitted by either
of the following methods:
Website: https://docs.google.com/
forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSd1NhLXHHHyhnj9xpxZ85MAMmTMxMxgGglc8LW6r
7QWI55Xg/viewform. Follow the
instructions for sending comments on
the agency website.
Email: manufacturingusa@nist.gov.
Include ‘‘RFI Response: Manufacturing
USA Institutes and Processes’’ in the
subject line of the message.
Instructions: Attachments will be
accepted in plain text, Microsoft Word,
or Adobe PDF formats. Comments
containing references, studies, research,
and other empirical data that are not
widely published should include copies
or electronic links of the referenced
materials.
All submissions, including
attachments and other supporting
materials, will become part of the public
record and subject to public disclosure.
NIST reserves the right to publish
relevant comments publicly, unedited
and in their entirety. Personal
information, such as account numbers
or Social Security numbers, or names of
other individuals, should not be
included. Do not submit confidential
business information, or otherwise
sensitive or protected information.
Comments that contain profanity,
vulgarity, threats, or other inappropriate
language or content will not be
considered.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Margaret Phillips, Associate Director for
Competitions, Office of Advanced
Manufacturing, National Institute of
Standards and Technology, 100 Bureau
Drive MS 4700, Gaithersburg, MD
20899, 301–975–4350, or by email to
manufacturingusa@nist.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Manufacturing USA was authorized
by the Revitalize American
Manufacturing and Innovation Act in
December 2014.1 In 2019 the House
Science Committee convened a hearing
on Manufacturing USA, leading to the
House passing the American
Manufacturing Leadership Act.
Concurrently the Senate developed and
passed the Global Leadership in
Manufacturing Act. Both of these bills
were reconciled and included into the
1 Consolidated and Further Continuing
Appropriations Act, 2015, Public Law 113–235,
Title VII—Revitalize American Manufacturing
Innovation Act of 2014, codified at 15 U.S.C. 278s.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
National Defense Authorization Act,
which was signed into law on December
20, 2019.2 This Manufacturing USA
reauthorization prescribes three
pathways for creating centers for
manufacturing innovation, or institutes
in the Manufacturing USA network. The
three pathways are:
(1) Institutes established pursuant to
Federal law or executive actions which
became members of the network,
(2) institutes created via competitions
held by the Secretary of Commerce
through the National Institute of
Standards and Technology (NIST), and
(3) manufacturing centers outside of
Manufacturing USA but recognized by
the Secretary of Commerce as centers for
manufacturing innovation in response
to a formal request by the centers for
such recognition. ‘‘A manufacturing
center that is substantially similar to
those established under this subsection
but does not receive financial assistance
under subsection (d) may, upon request
of the center, be recognized as a center
for manufacturing innovation by the
Secretary for purposes of participation
in the Network’’.
The third pathway may be termed the
‘‘alliance’’ model for membership in
Manufacturing USA. These could be
existing agency-sponsored institutes
which are no longer under a federal
financial aid agreement or existing
entities not in the network with relevant
characteristics that are new to the
network. NIST is seeking broad input
and participation from stakeholders to
assist in identifying and prioritizing
issues and proposed solutions on the
information provided regarding the
proposed ‘‘alliance’’ path to establish a
Manufacturing USA Institute.
Anticipated Benefits and Impact of the
‘‘Alliance’’ Model
Benefits to the Joining Entities
Entities that seek to join
Manufacturing USA through the
‘‘alliance’’ model stand to benefit in
ways that are both tangible and
intangible. Some of the key benefits are
identified below.
• Formal recognition and ‘‘branding’’
with associated visibility as a national
manufacturing innovation institute.
• Membership in a nationwide
network of manufacturing innovation
institutes with associated support.
Æ Enhanced communication with
leadership of the Manufacturing USA
Institutes.
2 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2020, Public Law 116–92, codified at 15 U.S.C.
278s, as amended.
E:\FR\FM\27FEN1.SGM
27FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 39 / Thursday, February 27, 2020 / Notices
Æ Opportunities for synergistic
collaboration with other institutes in the
network.
Æ Access to the shared network
services offered by the National Program
Office.3
• Eligibility for programmatic funding
specifically for entities designated as
Manufacturing USA Institutes which are
not federally sponsored. Grants may be
awarded on a competitive basis, subject
to the availability of funds, for public
service activities, such as workforce
development, outreach to small- and
medium-sized manufacturers, and other
activities aligned with the mission of
Manufacturing USA.
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with NOTICES
Benefits to the Manufacturing USA
Program and Existing Institutes
The alliance model for new
manufacturing innovation institutes and
their induction into Manufacturing USA
can facilitate expansion of the network,
and technical areas not currently
addressed by existing or pending
Manufacturing USA Institutes can be
established. In doing so, the federal
government can significantly leverage
its existing and future Manufacturing
USA investments to spur the U.S.
advanced manufacturing efforts already
underway.
The extensive public and private
sector inputs gathered by the Advanced
Manufacturing Partnership (AMP)
initiatives 4 5 and by the five ‘‘Designing
for Impact’’ regional workshops 6 held
around the country clearly indicate that
several technology areas of importance
to U.S. manufacturers remain to be
addressed by Manufacturing USA. The
alliance model can serve as a costeffective pathway to rapidly expand
technology coverage, geographical
reach, and national impact of
Manufacturing USA. It should however
be noted that the ‘‘alliance’’ model is
not intended to be a substitute for robust
long-term federal support of
Manufacturing USA.
Institutes in the network have the
potential to improve the
3 The interagency Advanced Manufacturing
National Program Office (AMNPO), which is
headquartered at NIST, is tasked with the role of the
National Program Office for Manufacturing USA.
4 Report to the President on Capturing Domestic
Competitive Advantage in Advanced
Manufacturing, Executive Office of the President,
President’s Council of Advisors on Science and
Technology, July 2012.
5 Report to the President on Accelerating U.S.
Advanced Manufacturing, Executive Office of the
President, President’s Council of Advisors on
Science and Technology, October 2014.
6 National Network for Manufacturing Innovation:
A Preliminary Design, Executive Office of the
President, National Science and Technology
Council, Advanced Manufacturing National
Program Office, January 2013.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Feb 26, 2020
Jkt 250001
competitiveness of United States
manufacturing, including in key
advanced manufacturing technologies,
and to accelerate non-Federal
investment in advanced manufacturing
production capacity in the United
States.
Existing institutes in Manufacturing
USA also stand to benefit from their
association with the alliance members.
Some of the key potential benefits to
existing institutes that are already in the
network are listed below.
• The new technology topics of the
joining entities will enrich the network
of institutes and will provide additional
opportunities for the existing institutes
to leverage complementary technical
capabilities and services offered by the
alliance members.
• Alliance members will have
different operational and governance
models. The existing and future
Manufacturing USA Institutes, and their
federal sponsor agencies, stand to
benefit from the best practices gleaned
from the different operational models
adopted.
Proposed Process for Alliance Model
Institutes
1. Information about the application
process will be on the Manufacturing
USA website.
2. Interested applicants can apply at
any time.
3. Applications will be evaluated by
a panel of Federal employees against
evaluation criteria to be determined. If
additional information is needed, it can
be requested by the panel.
4. Applicants will be notified of the
decision with regard to the review.
5. If an applicant is selected for as an
alliance institute, a binding
Memorandum of Understanding will be
executed by the applicant and NIST. A
template MOU will be made available
on the website along with instructions.
6. The addition is announced and
added to appropriate messaging as a
network member.
7. An orientation to the network will
be provided by Advanced
Manufacturing National Program Office
to each new member.
Request for Information
Respondents are encouraged—but are
not required—to respond to each
question and to present their answers
after each question. The following
questions cover the major areas about
which NIST seeks comment.
Respondents may organize their
submissions in response to this RFI in
any manner. Responses may include
estimates, which should be identified as
such.
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
11345
All responses that comply with the
requirements listed in the DATES and
ADDRESSES sections of this RFI will be
considered.
NIST is interested in receiving
responses to the following questions
from the stakeholder community:
1. Congress has defined specific goals
and activities for federally sponsored
Manufacturing USA Institutes. Which of
these goals and activities should be
minimal requirements for ‘‘alliance
pathway’’ institutes?
2. Should all Manufacturing USA
Institutes brought into the network
under an ‘‘alliance pathway’’ follow the
same process? If not, what should be the
differences?
3. Who/what types of entities should
be eligible to join the Manufacturing
USA network using the ’’alliance
pathway’’?
4. What additional opportunities
should be considered for a
Manufacturing USA alliance institute?
Technical projects? Education and
workforce efforts? Others?
5. Should joining the Manufacturing
USA network change any aspect of how
a current organization operates?
6. What, if any, administrative,
reporting, and meeting responsibilities
should be required for the alliance
institutes? For those responsibilities,
what technical or other support should
NIST provide to assist the alliance
institutes?
7. Should institutes joining the
Manufacturing USA network be able to
accept projects or funding from foreign
entities? If so, under what terms should
foreign entities be able to participate?
8. If an existing organization becomes
a member of Manufacturing USA via the
‘‘alliance pathway,’’ should that
organization still be eligible to apply to
be a fully funded institute under a
competition sponsored by a federal
agency?
9. How might the alliance pathway be
structured to ease entry to the network
by manufacturing centers that
specifically address underrepresented
technology areas of importance to U.S.
manufacturers, or that increase the
geographic reach and accessibility of the
Network to underserved customers and
communities?
10. What types of relationships
should exist, or be required, between
applicant entities and other federal
manufacturing programs, such as NIST’s
Manufacturing Extension Partnership
(MEP)?
11. Does the proposed process, as
described in this notice, seem
appropriate? Any suggestions for
changes?
E:\FR\FM\27FEN1.SGM
27FEN1
11346
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 39 / Thursday, February 27, 2020 / Notices
12. Applications will be evaluated by
a panel using evaluation criteria that has
yet to be determined. What are some
relevant evaluation criteria for use in
this process?
13. Do you have any other comments
or suggestions related to this proposed
approach?
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 278s, as amended.
Kevin A. Kimball,
Chief of Staff.
[FR Doc. 2020–03896 Filed 2–26–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
Schedules for Atlantic Shark
Identification Workshops and Safe
Handling, Release, and Identification
Workshops
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of public workshops.
AGENCY:
Free Atlantic Shark
Identification Workshops and Safe
Handling, Release, and Identification
Workshops will be held in April, May,
and June of 2020. Certain fishermen and
shark dealers are required to attend a
workshop to meet regulatory
requirements and to maintain valid
permits. Specifically, the Atlantic Shark
Identification Workshop is mandatory
for all federally permitted Atlantic shark
dealers. The Safe Handling, Release, and
Identification Workshop is mandatory
for vessel owners and operators who use
bottom longline, pelagic longline, or
gillnet gear, and who have also been
issued shark or swordfish limited access
permits. Additional free workshops will
be conducted during 2020 and will be
announced in a future notice.
DATES: The Atlantic Shark Identification
Workshops will be held on April 2, May
7, and June 11, 2020. The Safe
Handling, Release, and Identification
Workshops will be held on April 1,
April 3, May 1, May 4, June 1, and June
11, 2020. See SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION for further details.
ADDRESSES: The Atlantic Shark
Identification Workshops will be held in
Wilmington, NC; Bohemia, NY; and
Manahawkin, NJ. The Safe Handling,
Release, and Identification Workshops
will be held in Kitty Hawk, NC; Revere,
MA; Key Largo, FL; Kenner, LA; Palm
Coast, FL; and Ocean City, MD. See
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with NOTICES
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Feb 26, 2020
Jkt 250001
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Rick
Pearson by phone: (727) 824–5399.
The
workshop schedules, registration
information, and a list of frequently
asked questions regarding the Atlantic
Shark ID and Safe Handling, Release,
and ID workshops are posted on the
internet at: https://
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/atlantic-highlymigratory-species/atlantic-sharkidentification-workshops and https://
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/atlantic-highlymigratory-species/safe-handling-releaseand-identification-workshops.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Atlantic Shark Identification
Workshops
[RTID 0648–XT034]
SUMMARY:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for further
details on workshop locations.
Since January 1, 2008, Atlantic shark
dealers have been prohibited from
receiving, purchasing, trading, or
bartering for Atlantic sharks unless a
valid Atlantic Shark Identification
Workshop certificate is on the premises
of each business listed under the shark
dealer permit that first receives Atlantic
sharks (71 FR 58057; October 2, 2006).
Dealers who attend and successfully
complete a workshop are issued a
certificate for each place of business that
is permitted to receive sharks. These
certificate(s) are valid for 3 years. Thus,
certificates that were initially issued in
2017 will be expiring in 2020.
Approximately 169 free Atlantic Shark
Identification Workshops have been
conducted since April 2008.
Currently, permitted dealers may send
a proxy to an Atlantic Shark
Identification Workshop. However, if a
dealer opts to send a proxy, the dealer
must designate a proxy for each place of
business covered by the dealer’s permit
which first receives Atlantic sharks.
Only one certificate will be issued to
each proxy. A proxy must be a person
who is currently employed by a place of
business covered by the dealer’s permit;
is a primary participant in the
identification, weighing, and/or first
receipt of fish as they are offloaded from
a vessel; and who fills out dealer
reports. Atlantic shark dealers are
prohibited from renewing a Federal
shark dealer permit unless a valid
Atlantic Shark Identification Workshop
certificate for each business location
that first receives Atlantic sharks has
been submitted with the permit renewal
application. Additionally, trucks or
other conveyances that are extensions of
a dealer’s place of business must
possess a copy of a valid dealer or proxy
Atlantic Shark Identification Workshop
certificate.
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Workshop Dates, Times, and Locations
1. April 2, 2020, 12 p.m.–4 p.m.,
Hampton Inn, 124 Old Eastwood Road,
Wilmington, NC 28403.
2. May 7, 2020, 12 p.m.–4 p.m., La
Quinta Inn, 10 Aero Road, Bohemia, NY
11716.
3. June 11, 2020, 12 p.m.–4 p.m.,
Holiday Inn, 151 Route 72 West,
Manahawkin, NJ 08050.
Registration
To register for a scheduled Atlantic
Shark Identification Workshop, please
contact Eric Sander at ericssharkguide@
yahoo.com or at (386) 852–8588. Preregistration is highly recommended, but
not required.
Registration Materials
To ensure that workshop certificates
are linked to the correct permits,
participants will need to bring the
following specific items to the
workshop:
• Atlantic shark dealer permit holders
must bring proof that the attendee is an
owner or agent of the business (such as
articles of incorporation), a copy of the
applicable permit, and proof of
identification.
• Atlantic shark dealer proxies must
bring documentation from the permitted
dealer acknowledging that the proxy is
attending the workshop on behalf of the
permitted Atlantic shark dealer for a
specific business location, a copy of the
appropriate valid permit, and proof of
identification.
Workshop Objectives
The Atlantic Shark Identification
Workshops are designed to reduce the
number of unknown and improperly
identified sharks reported in the dealer
reporting form and increase the
accuracy of species-specific dealerreported information. Reducing the
number of unknown and improperly
identified sharks will improve quota
monitoring and the data used in stock
assessments. These workshops will train
shark dealer permit holders or their
proxies to properly identify Atlantic
shark carcasses.
Safe Handling, Release, and
Identification Workshops
Since January 1, 2007, shark limitedaccess and swordfish limited-access
permit holders who fish with longline
or gillnet gear have been required to
submit a copy of their Safe Handling,
Release, and Identification Workshop
certificate in order to renew either
permit (71 FR 58057; October 2, 2006).
These certificate(s) are valid for 3 years.
Certificates issued in 2017 will be
expiring in 2020. As such, vessel
E:\FR\FM\27FEN1.SGM
27FEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 39 (Thursday, February 27, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11344-11346]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-03896]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Institute of Standards and Technology
[Docket Number: 200213-0056]
Request for Information Regarding Manufacturing USA Institutes
and Processes
AGENCY: National Institute of Standards and Technology, Department of
Commerce.
ACTION: Request for Information (RFI).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Manufacturing USA reauthorization prescribes three
pathways for creating centers for manufacturing innovation or
institutes in the Manufacturing USA network. Through this Request for
Information (RFI), NIST is seeking comment from the public on the
pathway where manufacturing centers outside of Manufacturing USA are
recognized by the Secretary of Commerce as centers for manufacturing
innovation in response to a formal request by the centers for such
recognition. The law provides that a manufacturing center substantially
similar to Manufacturing USA institutes, but which do not have federal
sponsorship, may be recognized for participation in the network, but
does not specify criteria for similarity. This pathway may be termed
the ``alliance'' model for membership in Manufacturing USA. These could
be existing agency-sponsored institutes which are no longer under a
federal financial aid agreement or existing entities not in the network
with relevant characteristics that are new to the network. Through this
RFI, NIST also is seeking broad input and participation from
stakeholders to assist in identifying and prioritizing issues and
proposed solutions on the information provided regarding the proposed
``alliance'' path to designate a Manufacturing USA Institute, including
what should be the minimum characteristics and requirements for such
entities.
DATES: Comments must be received by 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on August
25, 2020. Written comments in response to the RFI should be submitted
according to the instructions in the ADDRESSES and SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION sections below. Submissions received after that date may
not be considered.
ADDRESSES:
For Comments:
Responses can be submitted by either of the following methods:
Website: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSd1NhLXHHHy-hnj9xpxZ85MAMmTMxMxgGglc8LW6r7QWI55Xg/viewform. Follow the instructions
for sending comments on the agency website.
Email: [email protected]. Include ``RFI Response:
Manufacturing USA Institutes and Processes'' in the subject line of the
message.
Instructions: Attachments will be accepted in plain text, Microsoft
Word, or Adobe PDF formats. Comments containing references, studies,
research, and other empirical data that are not widely published should
include copies or electronic links of the referenced materials.
All submissions, including attachments and other supporting
materials, will become part of the public record and subject to public
disclosure. NIST reserves the right to publish relevant comments
publicly, unedited and in their entirety. Personal information, such as
account numbers or Social Security numbers, or names of other
individuals, should not be included. Do not submit confidential
business information, or otherwise sensitive or protected information.
Comments that contain profanity, vulgarity, threats, or other
inappropriate language or content will not be considered.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Margaret Phillips, Associate
Director for Competitions, Office of Advanced Manufacturing, National
Institute of Standards and Technology, 100 Bureau Drive MS 4700,
Gaithersburg, MD 20899, 301-975-4350, or by email to
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Manufacturing USA was authorized by the Revitalize American
Manufacturing and Innovation Act in December 2014.\1\ In 2019 the House
Science Committee convened a hearing on Manufacturing USA, leading to
the House passing the American Manufacturing Leadership Act.
Concurrently the Senate developed and passed the Global Leadership in
Manufacturing Act. Both of these bills were reconciled and included
into the National Defense Authorization Act, which was signed into law
on December 20, 2019.\2\ This Manufacturing USA reauthorization
prescribes three pathways for creating centers for manufacturing
innovation, or institutes in the Manufacturing USA network. The three
pathways are:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act,
2015, Public Law 113-235, Title VII--Revitalize American
Manufacturing Innovation Act of 2014, codified at 15 U.S.C. 278s.
\2\ National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020,
Public Law 116-92, codified at 15 U.S.C. 278s, as amended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Institutes established pursuant to Federal law or executive
actions which became members of the network,
(2) institutes created via competitions held by the Secretary of
Commerce through the National Institute of Standards and Technology
(NIST), and
(3) manufacturing centers outside of Manufacturing USA but
recognized by the Secretary of Commerce as centers for manufacturing
innovation in response to a formal request by the centers for such
recognition. ``A manufacturing center that is substantially similar to
those established under this subsection but does not receive financial
assistance under subsection (d) may, upon request of the center, be
recognized as a center for manufacturing innovation by the Secretary
for purposes of participation in the Network''.
The third pathway may be termed the ``alliance'' model for
membership in Manufacturing USA. These could be existing agency-
sponsored institutes which are no longer under a federal financial aid
agreement or existing entities not in the network with relevant
characteristics that are new to the network. NIST is seeking broad
input and participation from stakeholders to assist in identifying and
prioritizing issues and proposed solutions on the information provided
regarding the proposed ``alliance'' path to establish a Manufacturing
USA Institute.
Anticipated Benefits and Impact of the ``Alliance'' Model
Benefits to the Joining Entities
Entities that seek to join Manufacturing USA through the
``alliance'' model stand to benefit in ways that are both tangible and
intangible. Some of the key benefits are identified below.
Formal recognition and ``branding'' with associated
visibility as a national manufacturing innovation institute.
Membership in a nationwide network of manufacturing
innovation institutes with associated support.
[cir] Enhanced communication with leadership of the Manufacturing
USA Institutes.
[[Page 11345]]
[cir] Opportunities for synergistic collaboration with other
institutes in the network.
[cir] Access to the shared network services offered by the National
Program Office.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The interagency Advanced Manufacturing National Program
Office (AMNPO), which is headquartered at NIST, is tasked with the
role of the National Program Office for Manufacturing USA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eligibility for programmatic funding specifically for
entities designated as Manufacturing USA Institutes which are not
federally sponsored. Grants may be awarded on a competitive basis,
subject to the availability of funds, for public service activities,
such as workforce development, outreach to small- and medium-sized
manufacturers, and other activities aligned with the mission of
Manufacturing USA.
Benefits to the Manufacturing USA Program and Existing Institutes
The alliance model for new manufacturing innovation institutes and
their induction into Manufacturing USA can facilitate expansion of the
network, and technical areas not currently addressed by existing or
pending Manufacturing USA Institutes can be established. In doing so,
the federal government can significantly leverage its existing and
future Manufacturing USA investments to spur the U.S. advanced
manufacturing efforts already underway.
The extensive public and private sector inputs gathered by the
Advanced Manufacturing Partnership (AMP) initiatives 4 5 and
by the five ``Designing for Impact'' regional workshops \6\ held around
the country clearly indicate that several technology areas of
importance to U.S. manufacturers remain to be addressed by
Manufacturing USA. The alliance model can serve as a cost-effective
pathway to rapidly expand technology coverage, geographical reach, and
national impact of Manufacturing USA. It should however be noted that
the ``alliance'' model is not intended to be a substitute for robust
long-term federal support of Manufacturing USA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Report to the President on Capturing Domestic Competitive
Advantage in Advanced Manufacturing, Executive Office of the
President, President's Council of Advisors on Science and
Technology, July 2012.
\5\ Report to the President on Accelerating U.S. Advanced
Manufacturing, Executive Office of the President, President's
Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, October 2014.
\6\ National Network for Manufacturing Innovation: A Preliminary
Design, Executive Office of the President, National Science and
Technology Council, Advanced Manufacturing National Program Office,
January 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Institutes in the network have the potential to improve the
competitiveness of United States manufacturing, including in key
advanced manufacturing technologies, and to accelerate non-Federal
investment in advanced manufacturing production capacity in the United
States.
Existing institutes in Manufacturing USA also stand to benefit from
their association with the alliance members. Some of the key potential
benefits to existing institutes that are already in the network are
listed below.
The new technology topics of the joining entities will
enrich the network of institutes and will provide additional
opportunities for the existing institutes to leverage complementary
technical capabilities and services offered by the alliance members.
Alliance members will have different operational and
governance models. The existing and future Manufacturing USA
Institutes, and their federal sponsor agencies, stand to benefit from
the best practices gleaned from the different operational models
adopted.
Proposed Process for Alliance Model Institutes
1. Information about the application process will be on the
Manufacturing USA website.
2. Interested applicants can apply at any time.
3. Applications will be evaluated by a panel of Federal employees
against evaluation criteria to be determined. If additional information
is needed, it can be requested by the panel.
4. Applicants will be notified of the decision with regard to the
review.
5. If an applicant is selected for as an alliance institute, a
binding Memorandum of Understanding will be executed by the applicant
and NIST. A template MOU will be made available on the website along
with instructions.
6. The addition is announced and added to appropriate messaging as
a network member.
7. An orientation to the network will be provided by Advanced
Manufacturing National Program Office to each new member.
Request for Information
Respondents are encouraged--but are not required--to respond to
each question and to present their answers after each question. The
following questions cover the major areas about which NIST seeks
comment. Respondents may organize their submissions in response to this
RFI in any manner. Responses may include estimates, which should be
identified as such.
All responses that comply with the requirements listed in the DATES
and ADDRESSES sections of this RFI will be considered.
NIST is interested in receiving responses to the following
questions from the stakeholder community:
1. Congress has defined specific goals and activities for federally
sponsored Manufacturing USA Institutes. Which of these goals and
activities should be minimal requirements for ``alliance pathway''
institutes?
2. Should all Manufacturing USA Institutes brought into the network
under an ``alliance pathway'' follow the same process? If not, what
should be the differences?
3. Who/what types of entities should be eligible to join the
Manufacturing USA network using the ''alliance pathway''?
4. What additional opportunities should be considered for a
Manufacturing USA alliance institute? Technical projects? Education and
workforce efforts? Others?
5. Should joining the Manufacturing USA network change any aspect
of how a current organization operates?
6. What, if any, administrative, reporting, and meeting
responsibilities should be required for the alliance institutes? For
those responsibilities, what technical or other support should NIST
provide to assist the alliance institutes?
7. Should institutes joining the Manufacturing USA network be able
to accept projects or funding from foreign entities? If so, under what
terms should foreign entities be able to participate?
8. If an existing organization becomes a member of Manufacturing
USA via the ``alliance pathway,'' should that organization still be
eligible to apply to be a fully funded institute under a competition
sponsored by a federal agency?
9. How might the alliance pathway be structured to ease entry to
the network by manufacturing centers that specifically address
underrepresented technology areas of importance to U.S. manufacturers,
or that increase the geographic reach and accessibility of the Network
to underserved customers and communities?
10. What types of relationships should exist, or be required,
between applicant entities and other federal manufacturing programs,
such as NIST's Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP)?
11. Does the proposed process, as described in this notice, seem
appropriate? Any suggestions for changes?
[[Page 11346]]
12. Applications will be evaluated by a panel using evaluation
criteria that has yet to be determined. What are some relevant
evaluation criteria for use in this process?
13. Do you have any other comments or suggestions related to this
proposed approach?
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 278s, as amended.
Kevin A. Kimball,
Chief of Staff.
[FR Doc. 2020-03896 Filed 2-26-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-13-P