Department of Defense May 2007 – Federal Register Recent Federal Regulation Documents

The Air Force Scientific Advisory Board (SAB) will meet on 28- 29 June, 2007 at the Arnold and Mabel Beckman Center of the National Academies of Sciences and Engineering in Irvine, CA. The purpose of the meeting is to present the findings and recommendations of the FY 2007 SAB studies. The meeting will be closed to the public to discuss matters covered under subsection (c), subparagraphs (1), (4), and (9)(B) of Section 552b, Title 5, United States Code.

The invention listed below is assigned to the United States Government as represented by the Secretary of the Navy. The Department of the Navy hereby gives notice of its intent to grant to Sage International, Ltd. a revocable, nonassignable, exclusive license to practice in the United States, the Government-owned invention described below:

This notice sets forth the schedule and summary agenda for the summer meeting of the Board of Visitors (BoV) for the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation (WHINSEC). Notice of this meeting is required under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463). The Board's charter was renewed on February 1, 2006 in compliance with the requirements set forth in Title 10 U.S.C. 2166. Date: Thursday, June 14, 2007. Time: 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. Location: 2212 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC. Proposed Agenda: The WHINSEC BoV will be briefed on activities at the Institute since the last Board meeting on November 30-December 1, 2006 as well as receive other information appropriate to its interests.

The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text of a section 36(b)( 1) arms sales notification. This is published to fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated 21 July 1996.

Under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1072, (5 U.S.C. Appendix, as amended), the sunshine in the Government Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and 41 CFR 102-3.65, The Department of Defense gives notice that it intents to establish the Department of Defense Audit Advisory Committee, as a discretionary Federal advisory committee. This committee will provide the Secretary of Defense, through the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)/Chief Financial Officer, independent advice on DoD's financial management, including the financial reporting process, systems of internal controls, audit process and processes for monitoring compliance with applicable laws and regulations. In accordance with DoD policy and procedures, the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)/Chief Financial Officer is authorized to act upon the advice emanating from this advisory committee. The Department of Defense Audit Advisory Committee shall be composed of no more than five members who are eminent authorities in the fields of financial management and audit. Committee members appointed by the Secretary of Defense, who are not full-time Federal officers or employees, shall serve as Special Government Employees under the authority of 5 U.S.C. 3109. The Department of Defense Audit Advisory Committee, in keeping with DoD policy to make every effort to achieve a balanced membership, includes a cross section of experts directly affected, interested and qualified to advice on financial and audit matters. Committee members shall be appointed on an annual basis by the Secretary of Defense, and with the exception of travel and per diem for official travel, shall serve without compensation. The Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)/Chief Financial Officer shall select the committee's chairperson from the committee's membership at large. The Department of Defense Audit Advisory Committee shall meet at the call of the committee's Designated Federal Officer, in consultation with the Chairperson, and the estimated number of committee meetings if four per year. The Designated Federal Officer shall be a full-time or permanent part-time DoD employee, and shall be appointed in accordance with established DoD policies and procedures. The Designated Federal Officer or duly appointed Alternate Designated Federal Officer shall attend all committee meetings and subcommittee meetings. The Department of Defense Audit Advisory Committee shall be authorized to establish subcommittees, as necessary and consistent with its mission, and these subcommittees or working groups shall operate under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (5 U.S.C., Appendix, as amended), the Sunshine in the Government Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and other appropriate Federal regulations. Such committees or workgroups shall not work independently of the chartered committee, and shall report all their recommendations and advice to the Department of Defense Audit Advisory Committee for full deliberation and discussion. Subcommittees or workgroups have no authority to make decisions on behalf of the chartered committee nor can they report directly to the Department of Defense or any Federal officers or employees who are not members of the Department of Defense Audit Advisory Committee.

The Defense Logistics Agency is amending a system of records notice to its existing inventory of record systems subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended.

On May 1, 2007, the Secretary of the Air Force, acting as Executive Agent of the Secretary of Defense, determined that the service of the groups known as: a. The U.S. and Foreign Civilian Employees of CAT, Inc., Who Operated in Korea Under Operation Book Lift During 1950 and 1951 and Any Ground Support Personnel Necessary to Support That Mission; b. The U.S. and Foreign Civilian Employees of CAT, Inc., Who Operated Air Force C-119 Aircraft to Drop Ammunition and Other Supplies to French Troops at Dien Bien Phu in 1954 and Any Ground Support Personnel Necessary to Support that Mission; c. The U.S. and Foreign Civilian Employees of CAT, Inc., Who Operated B-26 Aircraft in Indonesia From 1958 Through 1962, and Any Ground Support Personnel Who Supported That Mission: d. The U.S. and Foreign Civilian Employees of Air America, Inc., who Operated Fixed Wing or Helicopter Aircraft in Support of U.S. Army Special Forces in Laos as Part of Operation Hot Foot and Operation White Star From 1959 Through 1962, and in Support of Operation Mill Pond, the Airlift from Thailand to Tibet, and Any Ground Support Personnel Necessary to Support Those Missions; e. The U.S. and Foreign Civilian Employees of Air America, Inc., Who Operated Fixed Wing or Helicopter Aircraft in Direct Support of the U.S. Air Force Operating in Laos in the Steve Canyon Program (Ravens), the Site 85 Operation, Photo Reconnaissance, the Harp (sic) Program, and Search and Rescue (SAR) Operations for U.S. Military Flight Crews from 1964 Through 1974, and Any In-Country Ground Support Personnel, Who Were Necessary to Support Those Missions and Held Supervisory Positions; and f. The U.S. and Foreign Civilian Employees of Air America, Inc., Who Operated Fixed Wing or Helicopter Aircraft in Vietnam in Direct Support of the U.S. Army Special Forces from 1964 through 1975, and Any In-Country Ground Support Personnel, Who Were Necessary to Support those Missions and Held Supervisory Positions shall not be considered ``active duty'' for purposes of all laws administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).

Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), and the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) has prepared and issued a Record of Decision for the proposed testing activities on White Sands Missile Range (WSMR) proposed in the WSMR Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS). The PEIS addresses the potential environmental impacts associated with implementing the proposed action, alternative, and no action alternative over a 10-year period. The purpose of the proposed action is to provide adequate test areas and facilities to evaluate the lethality effectiveness of weapon systems used against simulated enemy ground targets producing, storing, or controlling Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). There is a need to improve the U.S. Military's weapon systems that are designed to defeat enemy military assets, including hardened and reinforced structures. These enemy military assets can house WMD and pose a significant threat to international stability and peaceful coexistence within and among nations. The military structures and equipment of the United States and its allies must also be refined to better withstand attack by enemy weapons systems to reduce collateral damage. The Record of Decision briefly summarizes the determination of the WSMR PEIS and announces DTRA's intended course of action with respect to the proposed alternatives and environmental mitigation measures presented in the WSMR PEIS.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Jacksonville District, intends to prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for a new borrow area for the Martin County Beach Erosion Control Project. In cooperation with Martin County, the study will evaluate alternative sand sources that will maximize shore protection while minimizing environmental impacts.

Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (5 U.S.C., Appendix, as amended), the Sunshine in the Government Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended) and 41 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 102-3.140 through 160, the Department of Defense announces the forthcoming sub committee meeting: Subcommittees of the Commission will conduct preparatory work meetings in the New Jersey area June 15th to gather information, conduct research and analyze relevant issues and facts in preparation for a meeting of the Commission. Pursuant to section 102-3.160(a) of 41 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), these subcommittee meetings are not open to the public, and the subcommittees are required to report their findings to the Commission for further deliberation. Locations include the East Orange VA Health Center. Additionally, the Sub Committees may visit public and private hospitals in the area for investigation of Centers of Excellence that apply to the Commission's Charter.

Under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972, (5 U.S.C. Appendix, as amended), the Sunshine in the Government Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and 41 CFR 102-3.65, the Department of Defense gives notice that it is renewing the charter for the Transformation Advisory Group. The Transformation Advisory Group, pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.50(d), is a discretionary Federal advisory committee established to provide the Secretary of Defense, through the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Commander, U.S. Joint Forces Command independent advice and recommendations on strategic, scientific, technical, intelligence and policy-related issues to the Nation's joint enterprise, and the U.S. Joint Forces Command. In accordance with DoD policy and procedures, the Commander U.S. Joint Forces Command is authorized to act upon the advice emanating from this advisory committee. The Transformation Advisory Group will be composed of more than 24 members drawn from a cross-section of experts in their fields. The areas of expertise include, but are not limited to, innovation, development, strategic communications, logistics, technologies, business practices, military, government, education, training, intelligence and appropriations. Committee members appointed by the Secretary of Defense, who are not full-time Federal officers or employees, shall serve as Special Government Employees under the authority of 5 U.S.C. 3109. Committee members shall be appointed on an annual basis by the Secretary of Defense, and with the exception of travel and per diem for official travel, shall serve without compensation. The Commander, U.S. Joint Forces Command shall select the committee's chairperson from the committee's membership at large. The Transformation Advisory Group shall meet at the call of the committee's Designated Federal Officer, in consultation with the Chairperson and the Commander U.S. Joint Forces Command. The Designated Federal Officer shall be a full-time or permanent part-time DoD employee, and shall be appointed in accordance with established DoD policies and procedures. The Designated Federal Officer or duly appointed Alternate Designated Federal Officer shall attend all committee meetings and subcommittee meetings. The Transformation Advisory Group shall be authorized to establish subcommittees, as necessary and consistent with its mission, and these subcommittees or working groups shall operate under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (5 U.S.C., Appendix, as amended), the Sunshine in the Government Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and other appropriate Federal regulations. Such subcommittees or workgroups shall not work independently of the chartered committee, and shall report all their recommendations and advice to the Transformation Advisory Group for full deliberation and discussion. Subcommittees or workgroups have no authority to make decisions on behalf of the chartered committee nor can they report directly to the Department of Defense or any Federal officers or employees who are not members of the Transformation Advisory Group. Pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.105(j) and 102-3.140, the public or interested organizations may submit written statements to the Transformation Advisory Group membership about the committee's mission and functions. Written statements may be submitted at any time or in response to the stated agenda of planned meeting of the Transformation Advisory Group. All written statements shall be submitted to the Designated Federal Officer for the Transformation Advisory Group, and this individual will ensure that the written statements are provided to the membership for their consideration. Contact information for the Designated Federal Officer can be obtained from the GSA's FACA Databasehttps:// www.fido.gov/facadatabase/public.asp. The Designated Federal Officer, pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.150, will announce planned meetings of the Transformation Advisory Group. The Designated Federal Officer, at that time, may provide additional guidance on the submission of written statements that are in response to the stated agenda for the planned meeting in question.

DoD is conducting a review of the Department's contract financing policies. As part of this review, DoD would like to hear the views of interested parties regarding the effectiveness of the financing policies presently used for DoD contracts.

In compliance with Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), DoD announces the proposed extension of a public information collection requirement and seeks public comment on the provisions thereof. DoD invites comments on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of DoD, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the estimate of the burden of the proposed information collection; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the information collection on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved this information collection requirement for use through October 31, 2007. This proposal also includes the information collection requirements presently approved under OMB Control Number 0704-0336 for use through December 31, 2007. DoD proposes that OMB extend its approval for these collections for 3 additional years.

DoD is proposing to amend the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to address statutory provisions relating to leasing. The proposed rule permits the lease of a vessel, aircraft, or combat vehicle only if the contract will be long-term or will provide for a substantial termination liability.

Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Secretariat has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a request to review and approve a revision of a currently approved information collection requirement concerning rights in data and copyrights. A request for public comments was published in the Federal Register at 72 FR 10178, on March 7, 2007. No comments were received. This OMB clearance expires on June 30, 2007. Public comments are particularly invited on: Whether this collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of functions of the FAR, and whether it will have practical utility; whether our estimate of the public burden of this collection of information is accurate, and based on valid assumptions and methodology; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways in which we can minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, through the use of appropriate technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

Pursuant to Public Law 92-463, notice is hereby given of a forthcoming meeting of the National Security Education Board Group of Advisors. The purpose of the meeting is to review and make recommendations to the Board concerning requirements established by the David L. Boren National Security Education Act, Title VIII of Public Law 102-183, as amended.

Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (5 U.S.C., Appendix, as amended), the Sunshine in the Government Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended) and 41 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Sec. Sec. 102-3.140 through 160, the Department of Defense announces the forthcoming sub committee meeting. Subcommittees of the Commission will conduct preparatory work meetings in the Chicago area to gather information, conduct research and analyze issues and facts in preparation for a meeting of the Commission. Pursuant to section 102-3.160(a) of 41 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), these subcommittee meetings are not open to the public, and the subcommittees are required to report their findings to the Commission for further deliberation. Locations include the DoD/VA combined Health Center at Naval Training Center Great Lakes. Additionally, the Sub Committees will visit public and private hospitals in the area for investigation of Centers of Excellence that apply to the Commission's Charter.

The President of the United States has directed the growth of the United States Army. In an unpredictable and rapidly changing global security environment, this directive is designed to ensure the Nation has the ground forces necessary to meet its strategic security and defense needs. These needs, as outlined in the National Security Strategy, include the disruption of terrorist networks, the prevention of nuclear proliferation, the support of peace and regional stability, the denial of rogue Nation support to terrorist organizations, and the promotion and advancement of democratic forms of government. The President has determined that the implementation of these security goals in the 21st century will require increased numbers of U.S. Army forces to sustain the military operaitons required to support these objectives. The Army, therefore, intends to prepare a PEIS to analyze alternatives for executing the Presidentially directed growth required to support the defense and security missions of the Nation in the 21st century. The Presidential decision directs the Army to add 74,200 active and reserve component Soldiers to its total end strength. This growth includes the addition of six Brigade Combat Teams (BCTs) and the combat support (CS) and combat service support (CSS) units required to support them. In addition, the growth of the force will include ``right sizing'' or rebalancing the Army force structure to add increaed numbers of high demand critical skills which have been identified as shortfalls. Military skills, such as military police, engineers, and explosive ordnance detachments, must be added to the force in greater numbers to meet the increased needs for these types of units in operational theaters abroad. Rebalancing of the Army's force is needed to ensure the Army has the proper capabilities to sustain operations for promoting global and national security now and into the foreseeable future. In addition to this growth, the Army recognizes the need to continue with initiatives to restructure its forces to implement the standard modular unit configurations directed by the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) in 2001 and 2006. Modularity is a critical component of Army Transformation and the Army continues to implement the QDR directive to standardize its units and their force structure. This standardization of Army force structure will continue to improve management and generate increased operational efficiencies within the Army. Stationing actions supporting modularity will be evaluated and considered in conjunction with stationing actions required to support Army growth. The PEIS will assess the environmental capacity of the Army's installations to accommodate different types and combinations of new units as part of the growth and restructuring. The PEIS will examine the potential environmental and socioeconomic impacts at installations resulting from various combinations of new unit stationing actions. These stationing actions could include additional CS or CSS units, the addition of different types of modular BCTs, or combinations of these actions at a given stationing location. Under the Army's modularity initiative, which standardizes BCT force structure, there are three types of maneuver BCTs that will be discussed in the PEIS. These include the infantry BCT which consists of approximately 3,500 Soldiers; the Stryker BCT which consists of approximately 4,000 Soldiers; and the heavy BCT which consists of approximately 3,800 Soldiers. Potential impacts resulting from stationing actions of new CS and CSS units and these maneuver BCTs will be discussed and assessed at installation locations that have potential to support the growth and restructuring of the Army. The PEIS will analyze the proposed action's impacts upon the natural, cultural, and man-made environments at those stationing locations best able to meet the needs of the Army and its Soldiers and Families. The Army intends to analyze the following alternatives in the PEIS: (1) Grow and restructure the Army by permanently stationing new units at existing Army installations within the United States and retaining some units at overseas installations outside of the continental United States that were originally scheduled to return to the United States; (2) Grow and restructure the Army by permanently stationing units at existing stationing locations within the United States. As part of this alternative, overseas installations would be used to temporarily accommodate a portion of Army growth while permanent facilities were constructed at existing Army installations within the United States; and (3) Grow and restructure the Army by permanently stationing new units at new and existing Army stationing locations within the United States. This alternative would include the construction of permanent party facilities at locations where the Army owns land but does not currently station permanent party personnel. As part of this alternative, overseas installations would be used to temporarily accommodate a portion of Army growth while permanent facilities were constructed within the United States. In addition to the above alternatives, the no-action alternatives will be considered and used as a baseline for comparison of alternatives. The no-action alternative is to retain the U.S. Army at its current and strength and force structure. The no-action alternative includes those realignments and stationing actions directed by Base Realignment and Closure legislation in 2005, Army Global Defense Posture Realignment, and Army Modular Forces initiatives. The no-action alternative serves as a baseline for the comparison only and is not a viable means for meeting the current and future strategic security and defense requirements of the Nation. Viable alternative stationing locations considered in this analysis for the growth of the Army are those installations that are best able to meet Army unit requirements for training ranges and maneuver space, housing and office space, maintenance and vehicle parking, and Soldier and Family quality of life (e.g., schools, gyms, medical facilities, reducing family disruption). The proposed action will require the Army to balance strategic, sustainment, and environmental considerations with evolving world conditions and threats to national defense and security.

This document summarizes the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) rule agreed to by the Civilian Agency Acquisition Council and the Defense Acquisition Regulations Council in this Federal Acquisition Circular (FAC) 2005-17. A companion document, the Small Entity Compliance Guide (SECG), follows this FAC. The FAC, including the SECG, is available via the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov.

This document is issued under the joint authority of the Secretary of Defense, the Administrator of General Services and the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. This Small Entity Compliance Guide has been prepared in accordance with Section 212 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996. It consists of a summary of the rule appearing in Federal Acquisition Circular (FAC) 2005-17, which amends the FAR. An asterisk (*) next to a rule indicates that a regulatory flexibility analysis has been prepared. Interested parties may obtain further information regarding this rule by referring to FAC 2005-17, which precedes this document. These documents are also available via the Internet at http:/ /www.regulations.gov/.

The Department of the Navy hereby gives notice for submission of donation applications for the destroyer ex-EDSON (DD 946), under the authority of 10 U.S.C. 7306. Ex-EDSON (DD 946) is located at the NAVSEA Inactive Ships On-Site Maintenance Office, Philadelphia, PA. Eligible recipients include: (1) Any State, Commonwealth, or possession of the United States or any municipal corporation or political subdivision thereof; (2) the District of Columbia; or (3) any organization incorporated as a non-profit entity under section 501 of the Internal Revenue Code. The transfer of a vessel under this law shall be made at no cost to the United States. The donee will be required to maintain the vessel in a condition satisfactory to the Secretary of the Navy as a static museum/memorial. The letter of intent must: a. Identify the specific ship sought for donation; b. Include a statement of the proposed use for the ship; c. Identify the proposed berthing location; d. If the applicant is not a state, territory or possession of the United States, or a political subdivision or municipal corporation thereof, or the District of Columbia, provide a copy of a determination letter by the Internal Revenue Service that the applicant is exempt from tax under the Internal Revenue Code, or submit evidence that the applicant has filed the appropriate documentation in order to obtain tax exempt status; e. If the applicant asserts that it is a corporation or association whose charter or articles of agreement denies it the right to operate for profit, provide a properly authenticated copy of the charter, certificate of incorporation, and a copy of the organization's by-laws; f. Provide a notarized copy of the resolution or other action of the applicant's governing board authorizing the person signing the application to represent the organization and to sign on its behalf for the purpose of obtaining a vessel; and g. Provide written affirmation that the prospective donee can submit a complete ship donation application to the Navy, compliant with the Navy's application requirements, by January 3, 2008. If the applicant is incapable of meeting this deadline, specific rationale must be provided along with identification of the events that must be achieved and the timeline necessary in order to submit a complete ship donation application to the Navy. The Navy reserves the right to provide a reasonable extension for receipt of applications, or to reject a request for extension and to proceed with other applications received by the January 3, 2008 deadline. Upon receipt of the letter of intent, the Navy will contact the prospective donees to ensure a full understanding of the application requirements. Qualified organizations wishing to apply for ex-EDSON must submit a complete application to the Navy by January 3, 2008, comprised of a business/financial plan, a technical plan (includes a towing plan, mooring plan, maintenance plan and environmental plan), a curatorial/ museum plan, and a community support plan (includes information concerning support from the community and benefit to the Navy). The application must address the following areas: a. Business/Financial Plan: The Business/Financial Plan must detail the estimated start-up and operating costs, and provide detailed evidence of firm financing adequate to cover these costs. Start-up costs include towing, mooring (this includes but not limited to the cost of acquiring and improving facilities, and dredging if required), ship restoration, museum development, and meeting environmental requirements (including permitting fees and expenses). Operating costs are those associated with operating and maintaining the vessel as a museum/memorial, including rent, utilities, personnel, insurance, periodic dry-docking, etc. Firm financing means available funding to ensure the first five years of operation and future stability for long- term operation. This can include pledges, loans, gifts, bonds (except revenue bonds), funds on deposit at a financial institution, or any combination of the above. The applicant must also provide income projections from sources such as individual and group admissions, facility rental fees and gift shop revenues sufficient to cover the estimated operating expenses. b. Technical: The technical plan is comprised of a Towing Plan, Mooring Plan, Maintenance Plan, and Environmental Plan. The Towing Plan describes how the ship will be prepared for tow and safely towed from it present location to the permanent display site proposed by the applicant. The Towing Plan must comply with all U.S. Navy Tow Manual requirements, which can be found at https:// www.supsalv.org/pdf/towman.pdf. The Mooring Plan describes how the ship will be secured at its permanent display site during normal and extreme weather conditions (including the 100-year storm event) to prevent damage to the ship, its mooring system, the pier, and surrounding facilities. Provide evidence of availability of a facility for permanent mooring of the ship, either by ownership, existing lease, or by letter from the facility owners indicating a statement of intent to utilize such facilities. Address any requirement to obtain site-specific permits and/or municipality approvals required for the facility, to include but not limited to, Port Authority and Army Corps of Engineers approvals/permits, where required. The mooring location must be acceptable to the Navy and not obstruct or interfere with navigation. The Environmental Plan describes how the applicant will comply with all federal, state and local environmental and public health & safety regulations and permit requirements. The applicant also should provide information necessary for the Navy to complete an environmental assessment of the donation as required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), including the impact of the donation on the natural and man-made environment, local infrastructure, and evaluation of the socio-economic consequences of the donation. The Maintenance Plan must describe plans for long-term, short-term, and daily maintenance of the vessel, including preservation and maintenance schedule, underwater hull inspections, emergency response and fire/flood/intrusion control, pest control, security, periodic dry- docking, and qualifications of the maintenance team. c. The Curatorial/Museum Plan includes two parts: a Curatorial Plan and a Historic Management Plan. The Curatorial Plan must describe the qualifications for a professional curator (and curator staff, if necessary). The plan must also describe how the museum will collect and manage artifacts, including a statement of purpose and description of access, authority, and collection management responsibilities. The Historic Management Plan must describe how the museum will display the vessel and exhibits, including a description of the historical context of the ship, vessel restoration plans, historical subject matter that will be displayed with the ship, and exhibit display plans. d. The Community Support Plan must include evidence of local support. Evidence of regional support should also be provided. This includes letters of endorsement from adjacent communities and counties, cities or states. Also describe how the location of the ship will encourage public visitation and tourism, become an integral part of the community, and how the ship will enhance community development. The Community Support Plan must also describe the benefit to the Navy, including, but not limited to, addressing how the prospective donee may support Navy recruiting efforts, the connection between the Navy and the proposed berthing location, how veterans associations in the area are willing to support the vessel, how the prospective donee will honor veterans' contributions to the United States, and how the exhibit will commemorate those contributions and showcase Naval traditions. The relative importance of each area that must be addressed in the donation application is as follows: Business/Financial Plan and Technical Plan are the most important criteria and are equal in importance. Within the Technical Plan, the Mooring Plan is of greatest importance, and the Towing Plan, Maintenance Plan and Environmental Plan are individually of equal importance but of lesser importance to the Mooring Plan. The Curatorial/Museum Plan and Community Support Plan are of equal importance, but of lesser importance than the aforementioned plans. Evaluation of the application(s) will be performed by the Navy to ensure the application(s) are compliant with the minimum acceptable application criteria and requirements. In the event of multiple compliant applications for the same vessel, the Navy will perform a comparative evaluation of the applications to determine the best-qualified applicant. The Secretary of the Navy or his designee will make the final donation decision.

The U.S. Naval Academy Board of Visitors will meet to make such inquiry, as the Board shall deem necessary into the state of morale and discipline, the curriculum, instruction, physical equipment, fiscal affairs, and academic methods of the Naval Academy. The meeting will include discussions of personnel issues at the Naval Academy, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. The executive session of this meeting will be closed to the public.

In accordance with requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Baltimore District, has prepared a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the proposed construction of a dredged material containment facility (DMCF) by the Maryland Port Administration (MPA). This FEIS was prepared as part of the submission of MPA's application for a Department of the Army permit to construct the facility in the Patapsco River, Baltimore City, MD. This application will be evaluated pursuant to Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The preferred alternative is for the construction of a stone, sand, and cofferdam structure that would impact approximately 131 acres of waters of the United States, including jurisdictional wetlands. The structure would be initially constructed to 10 feet above the mean lower low water (MLLW) elevation, with a future temporary elevation to 42 feet above MLLW, and an ultimate elevation of 36 feet above MLLW. The project would also include mechanical dredging of approximately 1.5 million cubic yards of overburden material within the footprint of the proposed disposal site, and the placement of this material at the Hart Miller Island disposal site, Baltimore County, MD. On-site (Masonville borrow) and offsite borrow material (Seagirt borrow material and upland borrow) would be used for the construction of the containment facility. The Seagirt borrow material would come from the Seagirt Marine Terminal Access Channel deepening and widening project. The Draft EIS was advertised in the Federal Register on May 19, 2006 (71 FR 29128). A supplement to the Draft EIS was advertised in the Federal Register on June 30, 2006 (71 FR 37545). The need to prepare a Supplement was due to the applicant's proposal to change the source of borrow material for the proposed construction of the preferred alternative to include the use of suitable material dredged from the Seagirt Marine Terminal Access Channels. The FEIS evaluates the construction of a DMCF with a footprint of 141 acres, which includes 131 acres of tidal open water and wetlands. The DMCF would be constructed to an initial height of 10 feet above MLLW and then raised to a height of 42 feet above MLLW before being graded to a final height of 36 feet MLLW, which would be the same height as the adjacent land. A detailed description of the proposed project and effects to the human environment are discussed in the FEIS for the Masonville DMCF. The FEIS outlines measures the applicant may implement to address impacts to air quality resulting from activities described in the permit application.