Notice of Intent To Seek OMB Approval To Collect Information: Forms Pertaining to the Scientific Peer Preview of ARS Research Projects, 18236-18238 [2019-08689]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
18236
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 83 / Tuesday, April 30, 2019 / Notices
2019 RATES—Continued
Regular
Import Inspection and Certification (grading of imported
tobacco for manufacturers and dealers).
Overtime
Includes
travel costs
in rate
Holiday
$0.0170/kg or $0.0080/pound
X
Start date
July 1, 2019.
1 Rulemaking
is in progress to change Commitment and Non-commitment to Scheduled and Unscheduled, respectively.
is in progress to change Resident and Fee Service to Scheduled and Unscheduled, respectively.
changes are applied in addition to hourly rates for resident service as specified in Part 56, Subpart A, § 56.52(a)(4); Part 56,
Subpart SA, § 56.54(a)(2); Part 70, Subpart A, § 70.76(a)(2); Part 70, Subpart A, § 70.77(a)(4) and Part 70.
4 Travel costs outside the United States will be added to the fee, if applicable.
2 Rulemaking
3 Administrative
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 15b; 7 U.S.C. 473a–b;
7 U.S.C. 55 and 61; 7 U.S.C. 51–65; 7 U.S.C.
471–476; 7 U.S.C. 511, 511s; and 7 U.S.C.
1621–1627.
Dated: April 25, 2019.
Bruce Summers,
Administrator, Agricultural Marketing
Service.
[FR Doc. 2019–08701 Filed 4–29–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Research Service
Notice of Intent To Seek OMB Approval
To Collect Information: Forms
Pertaining to the Scientific Peer
Preview of ARS Research Projects
Agricultural Research Service
(ARS), USDA.
ACTION: Notice and request for
comments.
AGENCY:
The proposed information
collection requirement described below
will be submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for
review, as required by the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 and OMB
implementing regulations. The
Department is soliciting public
comments on the subject proposal.
DATES: Written comments on this notice
should be submitted on or before July 1,
2019.
ADDRESSES: All comments concerning
this notice should be directed to the
Director and Program Coordinator listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.
Marquea D. King, Director and Program
Coordinator, Office of Scientific Quality
Review (OSQR), Agricultural Research
Service, 5601 Sunnyside Avenue,
Beltsville, Maryland 20705; Telephone:
301–504–3283; Fax: 301–504–1251;
email: marquea.king@usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The OSQR
will seek approval from OMB to update
six existing forms to ensure that ARS
can efficiently manage data associated
amozie on DSK9F9SC42PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:08 Apr 29, 2019
Jkt 247001
with the peer review of agricultural
research. All forms are transferred and
received electronically and may include
on-line submissions in the future.
Abstract: The OSQR was established
in September 1999 as a result of the
Agricultural Research, Extension, and
Education Reform Act 1998 (‘‘The Act’’)
(Pub. L. 105–185). The Act included
mandates to perform scientific peer
reviews of all research activities
conducted by USDA. The office
manages the ARS peer review system by
centrally coordinating all intramural
peer review functions for ARS research
projects on a 5-year cycle.
Each set of reviews is assigned a
chairperson to govern the panel review
process. Peer reviewers are external to
the Agency and non-ARS scientists.
Peer review panels are convened to
assess the technical/scientific quality
and correctness of each research project
plan. Each panel reviewer receives
information on a range of two to five
ARS research projects.
On average, 150 research projects are
reviewed annually by an estimated 185
reviewers. Whereby approximately 130
are reviewed by a panel and
approximately 20 are reviewed through
an ad hoc (written review) process. The
management and execution of this peer
review process is vastly dependent on
the use of these forms.
The OSQR will seek OMB approval of
the following forms:
1. Confidentiality Agreement Form:
USDA uses this form to document that
a selected reviewer is responsible for
keeping confidential any information
learned during the subject peer review
process. The Confidentiality Agreement
is signed before the reviewer’s
involvement in the peer review process.
The form requires an original signature
and can be submitted electronically.
2. Panelist Information Form: USDA
uses this form to gather the most recent
background information and diversity
and inclusion data about the reviewer,
and information relevant to paying an
honorarium and travel expenses when
needed. Sensitive information is
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
transmitted on this form and destroyed
after payment is received.
3. Peer Review of an ARS Research
Project Form (Peer Review Form): USDA
uses this form to guide the reviewer’s
expert comments in written form on the
assigned project plan. The form contains
the criteria for plan review and seeks
the reviewer’s narrative comments and
evaluation.
3. Additional Reviewer Comment
Form: This form is supplied to members
of a panel not assigned as a primary or
secondary reviewer on a particular
project plan; however, it encourages
additional expert comments or
recommendations for any plan
regardless of a reviewer’s assignment as
primary or secondary.
4. Ad Hoc Review Form: USDA uses
this in select cases (e.g., for reviewers
not participating in a panel review). It
contains a check-off listing of action
classes that allows reviewers to provide
an overall rating of the plan.
5. Recommendations for ARS
Research Project Form
(Recommendations Form): USDA uses
this form to guide the panel’s evaluation
and critique of the review process. The
form combines both primary and
secondary reviewers’ recommendations
of the research project plan.
6. Panel Expense Report Form
(Expense Report): USDA uses this form
to document a panel reviewer’s expense
incurred traveling to and attending a
peer review meeting. The expense
report asks reviewers to list lodging,
meal, and transportation expenses.
When completed, the form contains
sensitive information and is held in
compliance with ARS travel guidelines.
This form is used only in rare
circumstance when a panel meeting
requires that reviewers travel.
(1) USDA’s collection of information
on the Confidentiality Agreement Form
is needed to document that a selected
reviewer is responsible for keeping
confidential any information learned
during the subject peer review process.
The Confidentiality Agreement would
be signed before the reviewer’s
involvement in the peer review process.
E:\FR\FM\30APN1.SGM
30APN1
18237
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 83 / Tuesday, April 30, 2019 / Notices
(2) USDA’s collection of information
on the Panelist Information Form is
needed to collect the most recent
background information along with
diversity and inclusion data about the
reviewer. It contains sensitive
information.
(3) USDA’s collection of information
on the Peer Review Form and Reviewer
Comment Form is needed to guide
reviewers’ comments on the subject
project. Both contain review guidance
and space to insert comments.
(4) USDA’s collection of information
on the Ad Hoc Review Form is needed
to guide reviewer comments of those not
participating in a chaired panel and
affords a place to select an overall
Action Class rating for the plan.
(5) USDA’s collection of information
on the Recommendations Form is
needed to guide the panel’s critique of
the review process. It contains the
recommendations of the panel for the
subject research project.
(6) USDA’s collection of information
on the Expense Report Form is needed
to document a panel reviewer’s
expenses incurred by attending a peer
review meeting. The Expense Report
requests lodging, meal, and
transportation expense data. It includes
sensitive information.
Estimate of Burden: The burden
associated with this approval process is
the minimum required to successfully
achieve program objectives. The
information collection frequency is the
minimum consistent with program
objectives. The following estimates of
time required to complete the forms,
based on previous OSQR experience
with our current business model.
1. Confidentiality Agreement Form
(10 minutes completion time). The
reviewer must read and consider the
terms of the agreement and then sign
and date the form.
2. Chair and Panelist Information
Form (30 minutes completion time). The
reviewer provides standard personal
and diversity information, similar to
that found in grant review programs.
3. Panelist Peer Review of an ARS
Research Project Form (4–7 hours
completion time). Project page lengths
will vary. Reviewers may freely write as
much as they wish and complete the
form. To adequately evaluate a research
project plan that may exceed 60–70
pages in length, each reviewer must
thoroughly read each plan.
4. Reviewer Comment Form (60
minutes completion time). General
assessment of the plan with brief
comments on the approach and
feasibility of the project and about one
page.
5. Panel Recommendation for ARS
Research Project Form (30–60 minutes
completion time). The page length
significantly varies among panelist peer
reviews and reviewer comments. All
recommendation forms are completed
by the OSQR and further discussed and
revised by the reviewers as part of their
panel discussions. In-person panels are
handled in the same manner.
5. Panel Expense Report Form (30
minutes completion time).
Respondents and Estimated Number
of Respondents: Selected scientific
experts currently working in the same
discipline as the research projects being
peer reviewed. These external experts
are credible peers to ARS. Annually,
about 185 peer reviewers complete these
forms. Most all plans are discussed and
deliberated via webinar and telephone
conferencing. Travel is not generally
necessary. Thus, reviewers are not
expected to complete Panel Expense
Reports.
FREQUENCY OF RESPONSE
Number of
respondents
Form
Confidentiality Agreement ............................................................................................
Peer Review Forms (required and assigned 2 plans) .................................................
Reviewer Comment Form (reviewer is not assigned as primary or secondary review).
Expense Report (in-person reviewers) ........................................................................
Panelist Information Forms ..........................................................................................
Recommendations Form (non-online project reviews) ................................................
Annual frequency
185
200
6
1 per respondent (Total = 185).
2 per panel respondent (Total = 400).
2 per panel respondent (Total = 12).
6
185
82
1 per respondent (Total = 6).
1 per respondent/per form (Total = 185).
2 per respondent (Total = 164).
ESTIMATED TOTAL ANNUAL BURDEN ON RESPONDENTS
Number
completed
annually
Form
(time required to complete)
Confidentiality Agreement (10 minutes) ..................................................................................................................
Panelist Information Forms (30 minutes) ................................................................................................................
Peer Review Forms (∼6 hours) ...............................................................................................................................
Recommendations Form (2 hour) ...........................................................................................................................
Reviewer Comment Form (1 hour) ..........................................................................................................................
Expense Report (30 minutes) ..................................................................................................................................
amozie on DSK9F9SC42PROD with NOTICES
Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995, 44 U.S.C. chap. 35.
Comments: The Notice is soliciting
comments from members of the public
and affected agencies concerning the
proposed collection of information to (1)
evaluate whether the proposed
collection is necessary for the proper
performance of ARS functions,
including whether the information will
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:08 Apr 29, 2019
Jkt 247001
have practical utility; (2) evaluate the
accuracy of the estimated burden from
proposed collection of information; (3)
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity
of the information to be collected; and
(4) minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who
are to respond, including the use of
appropriate automated collection
techniques or other forms of information
technology (e.g., permitting electronic
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
185
185
200
82
6
6
Total burden
(hours)
31
93
1,200
164
6
3
submission of responses). All responses
to this notice will be summarized and
included in the request for OMB
approval.
All comments will become a matter of
public record.
E:\FR\FM\30APN1.SGM
30APN1
18238
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 83 / Tuesday, April 30, 2019 / Notices
Dated: March 27, 2019.
Simon Y. Liu,
Associate Administrator, Agricultural
Research Service.
[FR Doc. 2019–08689 Filed 4–29–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–03–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Research Service
Notice of Intent To Seek Renewal of an
Information Collection
Agricultural Research Service,
USDA.
ACTION: Notice and request for
comments.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 and
applicable regulations of the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), this
notice announces the intention of the
Agricultural Research Service (ARS) to
seek reinstatement of the ARS Animal
Health National Program Assessment
Survey. This voluntary information
collection will give the beneficiaries of
ARS research the opportunity to provide
input on the impact of research
conducted by ARS in the last national
program cycle for each respective
national program. This input will be
used in planning the research agenda for
the next 5-year program cycle.
DATES: Comments must be received by
July 1, 2019 to be assured of
consideration.
SUMMARY:
Address all comments
concerning this notice to Ms. Janice
Boarman, Program Analyst, Agricultural
Research Service, Office of National
Programs, 5601 Sunnyside Avenue,
Room 4–2116, Beltsville, Maryland
20705. Submit electronic comments to
Janice.Boarman@ars.usda.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Janice Boarman at (301) 504–4764.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Title: ARS Animal Health National
Program Assessment Evaluation Form.
OMB Number: 0518–0042.
Expiration Date: June 30, 2019.
Type of Request: Approval to seek
reinstatement of the ARS Animal Health
National Program Assessment Survey.
This voluntary information collection
will give the beneficiaries of ARS
research the opportunity to provide
input on the impact of research
conducted by ARS in the last national
program cycle for each respective
national program. This survey seeks
input from the beneficiaries of research
conducted by ARS for program planning
and helps ensure alignment of the ARS
amozie on DSK9F9SC42PROD with NOTICES
ADDRESSES:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:08 Apr 29, 2019
Jkt 247001
national programs with the needs of its
customers, partners, and stakeholders.
Abstract: ARS research covers the
span of nutrition, food safety and
quality, animal and plant production
and protection, and natural resources
and sustainable agricultural systems. It
is organized into fifteen national
programs that address specific areas of
this research. These national programs
serve to bring coordination,
communication, and empowerment to
approximately 690 research projects
carried out by ARS and focus on the
relevance, impact, and quality of ARS
research. The requested voluntary
electronic evaluation survey will give
the beneficiaries of ARS research the
opportunity to provide input on the
impact of several ARS national
programs. For the purpose of this
National Program Assessment, impact is
defined as research that has influenced
or will significantly influence the area
covered by the national program; has
created or will create information, best
practices, and/or economic
opportunities for the national program’s
customers, partners, and stakeholders;
or has enabled or will enable action and
regulatory agencies to formulate policies
and regulations to support American
agriculture. The report and evaluation
form will be available online through a
dedicated URL. The input provided
through the completion of the
evaluation form will be shared with
customers, partners, and stakeholders as
part of each national program
assessment process.
ARS has fifteen national programs,
each of which is assessed every 5 years
on a rotating basis as part of the ARS
national program planning cycle to
ensure the relevance, quality, and
impact of ARS research. The assessment
serves as both a retrospective evaluation
and as the foundation for future priority
setting for the Agency. Although the
exact process for an assessment varies
by the nature of the national program,
all assessments include the following
four stages:
• An in-house program assessment
and document review of
accomplishments and/or progress for
presentation to external reviewers;
• An external review of
accomplishments and/or progress based
on the preceding documentation review
and focused on the relevance, quality,
and impact of the research;
• Record the results of the review;
and
• Inform ARS leadership of the
evaluation results.
All the methodologies for an
assessment include developing a written
report of accomplishments from
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 9990
research conducted during the previous
5 years. One assessment method
involves sending the accomplishment
report to a broad group of informed
stakeholders and asking them to
respond by completing an online survey
about the impact of the national
program. This survey information is
then compiled into a report that can be
shared with stakeholders and ARS
Administrators. The survey information
can also be used for the next step of the
national program planning cycle, which
entails planning for the following 5
years.
This survey previously has been used
by only one ARS national program, but
interest in its use has expanded. Three
national programs will use the survey
within the 3-year information collection
period, which has been included in the
burden hour estimate. Because the ARS
national program planning cycle is 5
years in length and is staggered among
national programs, only one or two
national programs will be using the
survey in any given year. The survey
consists of a set of questions used in
common by several or all national
programs and a few questions specific to
a given national program.
Estimate of Burden: Completing the
electronic evaluation form is estimated
to average 15 minutes per response.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
600.
Estimated Number of Responses per
Respondent: 1.
Estimated Total Annual Burden on
Respondents: 150 hours.
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,
including the validity of the
methodology and the assumptions used;
(c) ways to enhance the quality, utility,
and clarity of the input provided by a
wide array of customers, and; (d) ways
to minimize the burden of the collection
of information on those who respond,
including the use of appropriate
automated, electronic, mechanical, or
other technology. Comments should be
sent to the address in the preamble. All
responses to this notice will be
summarized and included in the request
for OMB approval. All comments will
become a matter of public record.
Dated: April 3, 2019.
Simon Y. Liu,
Associate Administrator, ARS.
[FR Doc. 2019–08690 Filed 4–29–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–03–P
E:\FR\FM\30APN1.SGM
30APN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 83 (Tuesday, April 30, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18236-18238]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-08689]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Research Service
Notice of Intent To Seek OMB Approval To Collect Information:
Forms Pertaining to the Scientific Peer Preview of ARS Research
Projects
AGENCY: Agricultural Research Service (ARS), USDA.
ACTION: Notice and request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The proposed information collection requirement described
below will be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 and OMB
implementing regulations. The Department is soliciting public comments
on the subject proposal.
DATES: Written comments on this notice should be submitted on or before
July 1, 2019.
ADDRESSES: All comments concerning this notice should be directed to
the Director and Program Coordinator listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Marquea D. King, Director and
Program Coordinator, Office of Scientific Quality Review (OSQR),
Agricultural Research Service, 5601 Sunnyside Avenue, Beltsville,
Maryland 20705; Telephone: 301-504-3283; Fax: 301-504-1251; email:
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The OSQR will seek approval from OMB to
update six existing forms to ensure that ARS can efficiently manage
data associated with the peer review of agricultural research. All
forms are transferred and received electronically and may include on-
line submissions in the future.
Abstract: The OSQR was established in September 1999 as a result of
the Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act 1998
(``The Act'') (Pub. L. 105-185). The Act included mandates to perform
scientific peer reviews of all research activities conducted by USDA.
The office manages the ARS peer review system by centrally coordinating
all intramural peer review functions for ARS research projects on a 5-
year cycle.
Each set of reviews is assigned a chairperson to govern the panel
review process. Peer reviewers are external to the Agency and non-ARS
scientists. Peer review panels are convened to assess the technical/
scientific quality and correctness of each research project plan. Each
panel reviewer receives information on a range of two to five ARS
research projects.
On average, 150 research projects are reviewed annually by an
estimated 185 reviewers. Whereby approximately 130 are reviewed by a
panel and approximately 20 are reviewed through an ad hoc (written
review) process. The management and execution of this peer review
process is vastly dependent on the use of these forms.
The OSQR will seek OMB approval of the following forms:
1. Confidentiality Agreement Form: USDA uses this form to document
that a selected reviewer is responsible for keeping confidential any
information learned during the subject peer review process. The
Confidentiality Agreement is signed before the reviewer's involvement
in the peer review process. The form requires an original signature and
can be submitted electronically.
2. Panelist Information Form: USDA uses this form to gather the
most recent background information and diversity and inclusion data
about the reviewer, and information relevant to paying an honorarium
and travel expenses when needed. Sensitive information is transmitted
on this form and destroyed after payment is received.
3. Peer Review of an ARS Research Project Form (Peer Review Form):
USDA uses this form to guide the reviewer's expert comments in written
form on the assigned project plan. The form contains the criteria for
plan review and seeks the reviewer's narrative comments and evaluation.
3. Additional Reviewer Comment Form: This form is supplied to
members of a panel not assigned as a primary or secondary reviewer on a
particular project plan; however, it encourages additional expert
comments or recommendations for any plan regardless of a reviewer's
assignment as primary or secondary.
4. Ad Hoc Review Form: USDA uses this in select cases (e.g., for
reviewers not participating in a panel review). It contains a check-off
listing of action classes that allows reviewers to provide an overall
rating of the plan.
5. Recommendations for ARS Research Project Form (Recommendations
Form): USDA uses this form to guide the panel's evaluation and critique
of the review process. The form combines both primary and secondary
reviewers' recommendations of the research project plan.
6. Panel Expense Report Form (Expense Report): USDA uses this form
to document a panel reviewer's expense incurred traveling to and
attending a peer review meeting. The expense report asks reviewers to
list lodging, meal, and transportation expenses. When completed, the
form contains sensitive information and is held in compliance with ARS
travel guidelines. This form is used only in rare circumstance when a
panel meeting requires that reviewers travel.
(1) USDA's collection of information on the Confidentiality
Agreement Form is needed to document that a selected reviewer is
responsible for keeping confidential any information learned during the
subject peer review process. The Confidentiality Agreement would be
signed before the reviewer's involvement in the peer review process.
[[Page 18237]]
(2) USDA's collection of information on the Panelist Information
Form is needed to collect the most recent background information along
with diversity and inclusion data about the reviewer. It contains
sensitive information.
(3) USDA's collection of information on the Peer Review Form and
Reviewer Comment Form is needed to guide reviewers' comments on the
subject project. Both contain review guidance and space to insert
comments.
(4) USDA's collection of information on the Ad Hoc Review Form is
needed to guide reviewer comments of those not participating in a
chaired panel and affords a place to select an overall Action Class
rating for the plan.
(5) USDA's collection of information on the Recommendations Form is
needed to guide the panel's critique of the review process. It contains
the recommendations of the panel for the subject research project.
(6) USDA's collection of information on the Expense Report Form is
needed to document a panel reviewer's expenses incurred by attending a
peer review meeting. The Expense Report requests lodging, meal, and
transportation expense data. It includes sensitive information.
Estimate of Burden: The burden associated with this approval
process is the minimum required to successfully achieve program
objectives. The information collection frequency is the minimum
consistent with program objectives. The following estimates of time
required to complete the forms, based on previous OSQR experience with
our current business model.
1. Confidentiality Agreement Form (10 minutes completion time). The
reviewer must read and consider the terms of the agreement and then
sign and date the form.
2. Chair and Panelist Information Form (30 minutes completion
time). The reviewer provides standard personal and diversity
information, similar to that found in grant review programs.
3. Panelist Peer Review of an ARS Research Project Form (4-7 hours
completion time). Project page lengths will vary. Reviewers may freely
write as much as they wish and complete the form. To adequately
evaluate a research project plan that may exceed 60-70 pages in length,
each reviewer must thoroughly read each plan.
4. Reviewer Comment Form (60 minutes completion time). General
assessment of the plan with brief comments on the approach and
feasibility of the project and about one page.
5. Panel Recommendation for ARS Research Project Form (30-60
minutes completion time). The page length significantly varies among
panelist peer reviews and reviewer comments. All recommendation forms
are completed by the OSQR and further discussed and revised by the
reviewers as part of their panel discussions. In-person panels are
handled in the same manner.
5. Panel Expense Report Form (30 minutes completion time).
Respondents and Estimated Number of Respondents: Selected
scientific experts currently working in the same discipline as the
research projects being peer reviewed. These external experts are
credible peers to ARS. Annually, about 185 peer reviewers complete
these forms. Most all plans are discussed and deliberated via webinar
and telephone conferencing. Travel is not generally necessary. Thus,
reviewers are not expected to complete Panel Expense Reports.
Frequency of Response
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of
Form respondents Annual frequency
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Confidentiality Agreement......... 185 1 per respondent
(Total = 185).
Peer Review Forms (required and 200 2 per panel
assigned 2 plans). respondent (Total =
400).
Reviewer Comment Form (reviewer is 6 2 per panel
not assigned as primary or respondent (Total =
secondary review). 12).
Expense Report (in-person 6 1 per respondent
reviewers). (Total = 6).
Panelist Information Forms........ 185 1 per respondent/per
form (Total = 185).
Recommendations Form (non-online 82 2 per respondent
project reviews). (Total = 164).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number
Form (time required to complete) completed Total burden
annually (hours)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Confidentiality Agreement (10 minutes).. 185 31
Panelist Information Forms (30 minutes). 185 93
Peer Review Forms (~6 hours)............ 200 1,200
Recommendations Form (2 hour)........... 82 164
Reviewer Comment Form (1 hour).......... 6 6
Expense Report (30 minutes)............. 6 3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. chap.
35.
Comments: The Notice is soliciting comments from members of the
public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of
information to (1) evaluate whether the proposed collection is
necessary for the proper performance of ARS functions, including
whether the information will have practical utility; (2) evaluate the
accuracy of the estimated burden from proposed collection of
information; (3) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (4) minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who are to respond, including the
use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of
information technology (e.g., permitting electronic submission of
responses). All responses to this notice will be summarized and
included in the request for OMB approval.
All comments will become a matter of public record.
[[Page 18238]]
Dated: March 27, 2019.
Simon Y. Liu,
Associate Administrator, Agricultural Research Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-08689 Filed 4-29-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-03-P
