Notice of Intent To Extend a Currently Approved Information Collection, 2267-2268 [2012-629]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 17, 2012 / Notices
We will consider comments that
we receive by March 19, 2012.
ADDRESSES: We invite you to submit
comments on this notice by any of the
following methods:
• Internet: Go to https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
• Mail, hand deliver, or courier to
Dexter Thomas, GIPSA, USDA, 1400
Independence Avenue SW., Room
2530–S, Washington, DC 20250–3604.
• Fax to (202) 690–2173.
Instructions: All comments should be
identified as ‘‘High Quality Specialty
Grain Exported in Containers
Information Collection,’’ and should
reference to the date and page number
of this issue of the Federal Register. The
information collection package, public
comments, and other documents
relating to this action will be available
for public inspection in the above office
during regular business hours (7 CFR
1.27(b)). Please call GIPSA’s
Management and Budget Services at
(202) 720–7486 to arrange a viewing of
these documents.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
information regarding the collection of
information activities and the use of the
information, contact Candace Hildreth
at (202) 720–0203.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Congress
enacted The United States Grain
Standards Act (USGSA) (7 U.S.C. 71–
87k) to facilitate the marketing of grain
in interstate and foreign commerce. The
USGSA, with few exceptions, requires
that all grain shipped from the United
States must be officially inspected and
officially weighed. The USGSA
authorizes the Department of
Agriculture to waive the mandatory
inspection and weighing requirements
of the USGSA in circumstances when
the objectives of the USGSA would not
be impaired.
The Grain Inspection, Packers and
Stockyards Administration (GIPSA)
amended section 7 CFR 800.18 of the
regulations to waive the mandatory
inspection and weighing requirements
of the USGSA for high quality specialty
grain exported in containers. GIPSA
established this waiver to facilitate the
marketing of high quality specialty grain
exported in containers. GIPSA
determined that this action was
consistent with the objectives of the
USGSA and would promote the
continuing development of the high
quality specialty grain export market.
To ensure that exporters of high
quality specialty grain complied with
this waiver, GIPSA required exporters to
maintain records generated during the
normal course of business that pertain
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
DATES:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:12 Jan 13, 2012
Jkt 226001
to these shipments and make these
documents available to GIPSA upon
request for review or copying purposes
(76 FR 45397). These records shall be
maintained for a period of 3 years. This
information collection requirement is
essential to ensure that exporters who
ship high quality specialty grain in
containers comply with the waiver
provisions. GIPSA does not require
exporters of high quality specialty grain
to complete and submit new Federal
government record(s), form(s), or
report(s).
Title: Export Inspection and Weighing
Waiver for High Quality Specialty Grain
Transported in Containers.
OMB Number: 0580–0022.
Expiration Date of Approval: May 31,
2012.
Type of Request: Extension and
revision of a currently approved
information collection.
Abstract: GIPSA amended the
regulations under the USGSA to waive
the mandatory inspection and weighing
requirements for high quality specialty
grain exported in containers. GIPSA
established this waiver to facilitate the
marketing of high quality specialty grain
exported in containers. To ensure
compliance with this wavier, GIPSA
required these exporters to maintain
records generated during their normal
course of business that pertain to these
shipments and make these documents
available to GIPSA upon request, for
review and copying purposes.
Grain Contracts
Estimate of Burden: Public reporting
and recordkeeping burden for
maintaining contract information
averages 6.0 hours per exporter.
Respondents: Exporters of high
quality specialty grain in containers.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
80.
Estimated Number of Respondents
per Request: 1.
Estimated Total Burden on
Respondents: 480 Hours.
Estimated Total Cost: $2,640.
Comments: Comments are invited on:
(a) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate
of the burden of the proposed collection
of information including the validity of
the methodology and assumptions used;
(c) ways to enhance the quality, utility,
and clarity of the information to be
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information
on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
2267
automated, electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection
techniques or forms of information
technology. All responses to this notice
will be summarized and included in the
request for OMB approval. All
comments will also become a matter of
public record.
J. Dudley Butler,
Administrator, Grain Inspection, Packers and
Stockyards Administration.
[FR Doc. 2012–711 Filed 1–13–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–KD–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
National Institute of Food and
Agriculture
Notice of Intent To Extend a Currently
Approved Information Collection
National Institute of Food and
Agriculture, USDA.
ACTION: Notice and request for
comments.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 and
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) regulations at (5 CFR part 1320),
this notice announces the National
Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA)
intention to request approval for an
extension of the currently approved
information collection for the NIFA
proposal review process.
DATES: Written comments on this notice
must be received by March 19, 2012, to
be assured of consideration. Comments
received after that date will be
considered to the extent practicable.
ADDRESSES: Written comments
concerning this notice and requests for
copies of the information collection may
be submitted by any of the following
methods: Email: gmendez@nifa.
usda.gov; Fax: 202–720–0857; Mail:
Office of Information Technology (OIT),
NIFA, USDA, STOP 2216, 1400
Independence Avenue SW, Washington,
DC 20250–2216.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Gidel Mendez, eGovernment Program
Leader; Email: gmendez@nifa.usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Title: NIFA Proposal Review Process.
OMB Number: 0524–0041.
Expiration Date of Current Approval:
05/31/2012.
Type of Request: Extension of a
currently approved information
collection for three years.
Abstract: The National Institute of
Food and Agriculture (NIFA) is
responsible for performing a review of
proposals submitted to NIFA
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\17JAN1.SGM
17JAN1
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
2268
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 17, 2012 / Notices
competitive award programs in
accordance with section 103(a) of the
Agricultural Research, Extension, and
Education Reform Act of 1998, 7 U.S.C.
7613(a). Reviews are undertaken to
ensure that projects supported by NIFA
are of high quality, and are consistent
with the goals and requirements of the
funding program.
Proposals submitted to NIFA undergo
a programmatic evaluation to determine
worthiness of Federal support. The
evaluations consist of a peer panel
review and may also entail an
assessment by Federal employees and
electronically submitted (ad-hoc)
reviews in the Peer Review System.
Need and Use of the Information: The
information collected from the
evaluations is used to support NIFA
grant programs. NIFA uses the results of
the proposal evaluation to determine
whether a proposal should be declined
or recommended for award. When NIFA
has rendered a decision, copies of
reviews, excluding the names of the
reviewers, and summaries of review
panel deliberations, if any, are provided
to the submitting Project Director.
Given the highly technical nature of
many of these proposals, the quality of
the peer review greatly depends on the
appropriate matching of the subject
matter of the proposal with the
technical expertise of the potential
reviewer. In order to obtain this
information, an electronic questionnaire
is used to collect information about
potential panel and ad-hoc reviewers. If
the reviewer is already in our database,
the questionnaire asks potential
reviewers to update their basic
biographical information including
address, contact information,
professional expertise, and their
availability to review for NIFA in the
future. If the reviewer is new they are
prompted to complete the
questionnaire. This information has
been invaluable in the NIFA review
process, which has been recognized by
the grantee and grantor community for
its quality.
The applications and associated
materials made available to reviewers,
as well as the discussions that take
place during panel review meetings are
strictly confidential and are not to be
disclosed to or discussed with anyone
who has not been officially designated
to participate in the review process.
While each panelist certifies at the time
of preparing a review they do not have
a conflict-of-interest with a particular
application and will maintain its
confidentiality in the Peer Review
System, a certification of their intent at
the time of the panel review
proceedings is collected to emphasize
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:12 Jan 13, 2012
Jkt 226001
and reinforce confidentiality not only of
applications and reviews but also panel
discussions. On the Conflict-of-Interest
and Confidentiality Certification Form,
the panelist affirms they understand the
conflict-of-interest guidelines and will
not be involved in the review of the
application(s) where a conflict exists.
The panelist also affirms their intent to
maintain the confidentiality of the panel
process and not disclose to another
individual any information related to
the peer review or use any information
for personal benefit.
Estimate of Burden: NIFA estimates
that anywhere from one hour to twenty
hours may be required to review a
proposal. It is estimated that
approximately five hours are required to
review an average proposal. Each
proposal receives an average of four
reviews, accounting for an annual
burden of 20 hours. NIFA estimates it
receives 4,600 competitive applications
each year. The total annual burden on
reviewers is 92,000 hours. NIFA
estimates that the potential reviewer
questionnaire takes an estimated 10
minutes to complete. The database
consists of approximately 50,000
reviewers. The total annual burden of
questionnaire is 8,330 hours. NIFA
estimates that the potential Conflict-ofInterest and Confidentiality Certification
Form takes an estimated 10 minutes to
complete. The agency has
approximately 1,000 panelists each
year. The total annual burden of the
certification form is 167 hours. The total
annual burden of the component of the
entire review process is 100,497 hours.
Comments: Comments are invited on:
(a) Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
Agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(b) the accuracy of the Agency’s
estimate of the burden of the proposed
collection of information; (c) ways to
enhance the quality, utility and clarity
of the information to be collected; and
(d) ways to minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who
are to respond, including through the
use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
All responses to this notice will be
summarized and included in the request
to OMB for approval. All comments will
become a matter of public record.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Done in Washington, DC this 9th day of
January 2012.
Catherine E. Woteki,
Under Secretary, Research, Education, and
Economics.
[FR Doc. 2012–629 Filed 1–13–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Rural Utilities Service
Dairyland Power Cooperative: CapX
2020 Hampton-Rochester-La Crosse
Transmission Line Project
AGENCY:
Rural Utilities Service, USDA.
Notice of intent to extend public
comment period for a Draft
Environmental Impact Statement.
ACTION:
Notice is hereby given that
the Rural Utilities Service (RUS) is
extending the public comment period
for the Draft Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) to meet its
responsibilities under the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and
7 CFR 1794 related to providing
financial assistance to Dairyland Power
Cooperative (Dairyland) for its share in
the construction of a proposed 345kilovolt (kV) transmission line and
associated infrastructure between
Hampton, Minnesota and the La Crosse
area in Wisconsin (the proposed
project). Dairyland is participating in
the proposed project with a number of
other utilities (Applicants).
The purpose of the proposed project
is to: (1) Improve community reliability
of the transmission system in Rochester,
Winona, La Crosse, and the surrounding
areas, which include areas served by
Dairyland; (2) improve the regional
reliability of the transmission system;
and (3) increase generation outlet
capacity.
SUMMARY:
Written comments on this Draft
EIS will be accepted 30 days following
the publication of this notice in the
Federal Register. Written comments
should be sent to Stephanie A. Strength,
see the Address portion of this notice.
DATES:
A copy of the Draft EIS may
be viewed online at the following Web
site: https://www.rurdev.usda.gov/UWP–
CapX2020–Hampton-RochesterLaCrosse.html and at the following
repositories:
ADDRESSES:
Alma Public Library, 312 North Main
Street Alma, WI 54610, Phone: 608–
685–3823.
Arcadia Public Library, 406 E Main
Street Arcadia, WI 54612, Phone:
608–323–7505.
E:\FR\FM\17JAN1.SGM
17JAN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 10 (Tuesday, January 17, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2267-2268]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-629]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
National Institute of Food and Agriculture
Notice of Intent To Extend a Currently Approved Information
Collection
AGENCY: National Institute of Food and Agriculture, USDA.
ACTION: Notice and request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 and
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) regulations at (5 CFR part 1320),
this notice announces the National Institute of Food and Agriculture
(NIFA) intention to request approval for an extension of the currently
approved information collection for the NIFA proposal review process.
DATES: Written comments on this notice must be received by March 19,
2012, to be assured of consideration. Comments received after that date
will be considered to the extent practicable.
ADDRESSES: Written comments concerning this notice and requests for
copies of the information collection may be submitted by any of the
following methods: Email: gmendez@nifa.usda.gov; Fax: 202-720-0857;
Mail: Office of Information Technology (OIT), NIFA, USDA, STOP 2216,
1400 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250-2216.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gidel Mendez, eGovernment Program
Leader; Email: gmendez@nifa.usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Title: NIFA Proposal Review Process.
OMB Number: 0524-0041.
Expiration Date of Current Approval: 05/31/2012.
Type of Request: Extension of a currently approved information
collection for three years.
Abstract: The National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) is
responsible for performing a review of proposals submitted to NIFA
[[Page 2268]]
competitive award programs in accordance with section 103(a) of the
Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of 1998, 7
U.S.C. 7613(a). Reviews are undertaken to ensure that projects
supported by NIFA are of high quality, and are consistent with the
goals and requirements of the funding program.
Proposals submitted to NIFA undergo a programmatic evaluation to
determine worthiness of Federal support. The evaluations consist of a
peer panel review and may also entail an assessment by Federal
employees and electronically submitted (ad-hoc) reviews in the Peer
Review System.
Need and Use of the Information: The information collected from the
evaluations is used to support NIFA grant programs. NIFA uses the
results of the proposal evaluation to determine whether a proposal
should be declined or recommended for award. When NIFA has rendered a
decision, copies of reviews, excluding the names of the reviewers, and
summaries of review panel deliberations, if any, are provided to the
submitting Project Director.
Given the highly technical nature of many of these proposals, the
quality of the peer review greatly depends on the appropriate matching
of the subject matter of the proposal with the technical expertise of
the potential reviewer. In order to obtain this information, an
electronic questionnaire is used to collect information about potential
panel and ad-hoc reviewers. If the reviewer is already in our database,
the questionnaire asks potential reviewers to update their basic
biographical information including address, contact information,
professional expertise, and their availability to review for NIFA in
the future. If the reviewer is new they are prompted to complete the
questionnaire. This information has been invaluable in the NIFA review
process, which has been recognized by the grantee and grantor community
for its quality.
The applications and associated materials made available to
reviewers, as well as the discussions that take place during panel
review meetings are strictly confidential and are not to be disclosed
to or discussed with anyone who has not been officially designated to
participate in the review process. While each panelist certifies at the
time of preparing a review they do not have a conflict-of-interest with
a particular application and will maintain its confidentiality in the
Peer Review System, a certification of their intent at the time of the
panel review proceedings is collected to emphasize and reinforce
confidentiality not only of applications and reviews but also panel
discussions. On the Conflict-of-Interest and Confidentiality
Certification Form, the panelist affirms they understand the conflict-
of-interest guidelines and will not be involved in the review of the
application(s) where a conflict exists. The panelist also affirms their
intent to maintain the confidentiality of the panel process and not
disclose to another individual any information related to the peer
review or use any information for personal benefit.
Estimate of Burden: NIFA estimates that anywhere from one hour to
twenty hours may be required to review a proposal. It is estimated that
approximately five hours are required to review an average proposal.
Each proposal receives an average of four reviews, accounting for an
annual burden of 20 hours. NIFA estimates it receives 4,600 competitive
applications each year. The total annual burden on reviewers is 92,000
hours. NIFA estimates that the potential reviewer questionnaire takes
an estimated 10 minutes to complete. The database consists of
approximately 50,000 reviewers. The total annual burden of
questionnaire is 8,330 hours. NIFA estimates that the potential
Conflict-of-Interest and Confidentiality Certification Form takes an
estimated 10 minutes to complete. The agency has approximately 1,000
panelists each year. The total annual burden of the certification form
is 167 hours. The total annual burden of the component of the entire
review process is 100,497 hours.
Comments: Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of
the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to
enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information on those who are to respond, including through the use of
appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological
collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the
request to OMB for approval. All comments will become a matter of
public record.
Done in Washington, DC this 9th day of January 2012.
Catherine E. Woteki,
Under Secretary, Research, Education, and Economics.
[FR Doc. 2012-629 Filed 1-13-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-22-P