[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 27 (Tuesday, February 10, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6244-6248]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-2786]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service


Revisions to the Guidelines for State Plans of Work for the 
Agricultural Research and Extension Formula Funds

AGENCY: Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service, 
USDA.

ACTION: Final notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension 
Service (CSREES) is implementing the Revisions to the Guidelines for 
State Plans of Work for the Agricultural Research and Extension Formula 
Funds (64 FR 19242-19248). These guidelines prescribe the procedures to 
be followed by the eligible institutions receiving Federal agricultural 
research and extension formula funds under the Hatch Act of 1887, as 
amended (7 U.S.C. 361a et seq.); sections 3(b)(1) and (c) of the Smith-
Lever Act of 1914, as amended (7 U.S.C. 343 (b)(1) and (c)); and 
sections 1444 and 1445 of the National Agricultural Research, 
Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977, as amended (7 U.S.C. 3221 
and 3222). The recipients of these funds are commonly referred to as 
the 1862 land-grant institutions and 1890 land-grant institutions, 
including Tuskegee University and West Virginia State College. CSREES 
is also revising and reinstating a previously approved

[[Page 6245]]

information collection (OMB No. 0524-0036) associated with these 
Guidelines.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Bart Hewitt; Program Analyst, 
Planning and Accountability, Office of the Administrator; Cooperative 
State Research, Education, and Extension Service; U.S. Department of 
Agriculture; Washington, DC 20250; at 202-720-5623, 202-720-7714 (fax) 
or via electronic mail at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#5032383527392424103323223535237e252334317e373f26"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="7f1d171a08160b0b3f1c0c0d1a1a0c510a0c1b1e51181009">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: CSREES published a notice and request for 
comment on the Proposed Revisions to the Guidelines for State Plans of 
Work for the Agricultural Research and Extension Formula Funds in the 
Federal Register on August 7, 2003 (68 FR 47012-47015).

Background and Purpose

    The Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service 
(CSREES) is implementing the following revision to the Guidelines for 
State Plans of Work for the Agricultural Research and Extension Formula 
Funds which implement the plan-of-work reporting requirements enacted 
in the Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of 
1998 (AREERA), Pub. L. 105-185, by adding Part V, FY 2005-FY 2006 Plan 
of Work Update. The 1862 and 1890 land-grant institutions are required 
to submit a Plan of Work Update only for FY 2005 and FY 2006, instead 
of submitting a new 5-Year Plan of Work for FY 2005-FY 2009, as CSREES 
needs to incorporate the recommendations from the USDA Office of 
Inspector General (OIG) Audit No. 13001-3-Te, CSREES Implementation of 
the Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of 1998 
(AREERA). Consequently, once the final audit recommendations are made, 
CSREES needs time to develop a viable electronic option for compliance 
with the Government Paperwork Elimination Act (GPEA). Currently, 
institutions are submitting their reports via e-mail in WordPerfect 
file format, Microsoft Word file format, or ASCII file format, and the 
institutions should continue to do so until a viable electronic option 
is available.
    The objective of the USDA OIG Audit is to determine whether CSREES 
established effective controls to ensure land-grant institutions 
implemented AREERA provisions in accordance with the law and 
regulations. The audit began on November 8, 2002, and the report is 
currently being drafted. CSREES would like to consider the findings and 
recommendations of that audit in the design of the next 5-year plan of 
work. Time also is needed for CSREES to consult with its partnering 
institutions--1862 and 1890 land-grant institutions--in any redesign of 
the plan-of-work reporting system or extensive revision of the existing 
Guidelines for the State Plans of Work. This 2-year period will allow 
for the consideration of the USDA OIG audit findings and 
recommendations, opportunity to consult with the 1862 and 1890 land-
grant institutions on any extensive revisions to the current Guidelines 
for State Plans of Work, and the development of a viable electronic 
option in compliance with GPEA.
    CSREES also is changing the due date of the Annual Report of 
Accomplishments and Results from March 1 to April 1. On December 28, 
2000 (65 FR 82317), CSREES changed the original due date for the Annual 
Reports of Accomplishments and Results from December 31 to the 
following March 1 after consultation with the 1862 and 1890 land-grant 
institutions. CSREES is now extending the due date for the Annual 
Report of Accomplishments and Results to April 1, 2004, for FY 2003; 
April 1, 2005, for FY 2004; April 1, 2006, for FY 2005; and April 1, 
2007, for FY 2006.
    The Proposed Guidelines were published in the Federal Register as a 
notice with a 30-day comment period on August 7, 2003, and these Final 
Guidelines reflect consideration by CSREES of the comments received.
    The due date for submission of the FY 2005-FY 2006 Plan of Work 
Update for the period covering October 1, 2004, through September 2006, 
is April 1, 2004.

Public Comments and Guideline Changes in Response

    In the Notice of the Proposed Guidelines, CSREES invited comments 
on the Proposed Guidelines as well as comments 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 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 
collection of information on those who are to respond, including the 
use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other 
technological collection techniques or other forms of information 
technology. Thirteen comments were received. All 13 were from deans, 
directors, administrators, or their representatives of research and 
extension programs at the 1862 land-grant institutions. Eleven of the 
13 commenters made comments on the proposed guidelines. Twelve of the 
13 commenters made comments on the proposed collection of information.
    The most significant comments which required a change to the 
guidelines centered around the accuracy of, and the amount of, the 
burden hours required to complete the FY 2005-FY 2006 Plan of Work 
Update. Based on these comments, CSREES is making a change to the 
guidelines to indicate that it will only require a 5- to 10-page FY 
2005-FY 2006 Plan of Work Update to allow the institutions to outline 
any changes and additions made to the FY 2000-FY 2004 5-Year Plan of 
Work currently in place. The CSREES responses to specific comments are 
as follows.

Positive Comments

    Comment: Six of the 11 comments that focused on the guidelines were 
positive comments. Four commenters supported the change in submitting 
the Annual Report from March 1 to April 1 of each year. Two commenters 
generally approved of all the proposed changes to the guidelines as 
outlined in the Federal Register. One commenter stated that since the 
requirements for the proposed 2-year extension are not being changed 
from the current 5-year plan, the proposal will ensure continuity and 
will enable research and extension personnel to anticipate and prepare 
the reports in a consistent manner. The commenter further stated that 
the time frame is consistent with their next strategic planning cycle 
for research and extension programs involving broad-based stakeholder 
input and would not impose a reporting burden.
    CSREES Response: CSREES agrees and appreciates the positive 
feedback where appropriate.

Submitting a FY 2005-FY 2006 Plan of Work Update

    Comment: Four commenters stated that amending the FY 2000-FY 2004 
Plan of Work is an insufficient alternative for their institutions due 
to programmatic, procedural, and administrative changes that have 
occurred and that any resources invested should be used to build a new 
5-year plan, rather than to update the current plan.
    CSREES Response: CSREES disagrees as it wants to involve the Land-
Grant University system that receives the Federal formula funds in any 
changes to

[[Page 6246]]

the next 5-Year Plan of Work. The Agency also believes that the 
discussion with the system cannot begin until a final report is issued 
on the Office of Inspector General Audit No. 13001-3-Te, CSREES 
Implementation of the Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education 
Reform Act of 1998 (AREERA). Also, the Agency believes that it needs 
time, once the final recommendations are made, to develop a viable 
electronic option for compliance with the Government Paperwork 
Elimination Act (GPEA). CSREES believes it cannot be ready to implement 
this system for the next 5-Year Plan of Work until the Summer of 2005. 
The Land-Grant University system that receives Federal formula funds 
could then be trained to use the new electronic system with the FY 
2007-FY 2011 5-Year Plan of Work due in the spring of 2006.
    CSREES Comment: These same four commenters plus one other commenter 
suggested that the states should be given an automatic 1-year renewal 
or extension of their current plan, and that a new 5-Year Plan of Work 
be filed by all states beginning with FY 2006.
    CSREES Response: CSREES disagrees with this position as it needs 
the brief updates to the 5-Year Plan of Work to insure that 
institutions are considering stakeholder input as required under 
section 102(c) of AREERA and that program objectives have been revised 
and developed to address the critical agricultural issues in the state. 
In addition, CSREES needs to insure that all the requirements of AREERA 
sections 103(e), 105, 202, 204, and 225 continue to be met by the 
institutions.

Due Date

    Comment: Only one commenter thought that they were not in a 
position to submit the Plan of Work Update simultaneously with the 
Annual Report and suggested that the Plan of Work Update be submitted 
on July 1, 2004, instead of April 1, 2004.
    CSREES Response: CSREES needs to receive the FY 2005-FY 2006 Plan 
of Work Update earlier than July 1 in order to thoroughly review any 
changes an institution may make to their original 5-Year Plan of Work 
and approve them prior to October 1, 2004, in order to guarantee the 
timely release of first quarter FY 2005 formula funds. On a case-by-
case basis, CSREES has extended the reporting due date for an 
individual institution in the past and will continue to consider a 
submission extension in this same manner.

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

    Comment: One commenter assumes the information is useful to the 
agency for coordination of national initiatives and planning and 
reporting of these initiatives at national and state levels.
    CSREES Response: CSREES agrees and appreciates positive feedback 
where appropriate.
    Comment: One commenter states that extending the Plan of Work and 
asking for accountability against the same is appropriate, but 
questions the merit review process as an unnecessary use of time and 
duplication of effort, given the ongoing level of review most programs 
are continually involved in with stakeholders, clients, and external 
department and college reviews.
    CSREES Response: CSREES disagrees but recognizes the burden that 
this additional accountability requirement places on the institutions. 
However, the merit review process is an integral part of AREERA; it 
pertains to the Plan of Work and must be included in order to receive 
funds. Section 103(e)(1) of AREERA states that ``1862 AND 1890 
INSTITUTIONS.--Effective October 1, 1999, to be eligible to obtain 
agricultural research or extension funds from the Secretary for an 
activity, each 1862 Institution and 1890 Institution shall--(A) 
establish a process for merit review of the activity; and (B) review 
the activity in accordance with the process.''
    Comment: Another commenter assumes that well-crafted plans of work 
provide a clear vision of goals and objectives of each state's 
programs, and therefore these documents are useful to the agency.
    CSREES Response: CSREES agrees and appreciates positive feedback 
where appropriate.

The Accuracy of the Agency's Estimate of the Burden of the Proposed 
Collection of Information

    Comment: Four commenters thought the estimate of time required was 
accurate or reasonable. Seven commenters thought the estimate of time 
required was significantly underestimated.
    CSREES Response: CSREES agrees in part with the seven commenters on 
the estimate of time. CSREES agrees that the estimate of burden for an 
entirely new 5-Year Plan of Work will take considerably more effort, 
and thus, burden, than was estimated here. However, CSREES based its 
estimate of time required for submitting a 2-Year Plan of Work Update 
of a representative sample of all four regions and an assumption that 
an amendment to the current 5-Year Plan of Work would take about 10 
percent as much effort as a newly developed 5-Year Plan of Work upon 
which the original survey was based. The 10 percent estimated burden 
for a Plan of Work Update was approved in the original Plan of Work 
guidelines published in 1999. In fact, representatives of CSREES 
administration discussed this issue of perceived burden with the State 
Agricultural Experiment Station directors on September 24, 2003, in 
Dearborn, Michigan, after most of these comments had been received by 
CSREES. Once CSREES explained what is expected in the FY 2005-FY 2006 
Plan of Work Update, the directors understood that the burden will be 
minimal. CSREES recognizes that for some states that have many changes 
to make in their 5-Year Plan of Work, it may take more time than 
estimated, and for other states that have little or no changes to make 
in the 5-Year Plan of Work, it will take less time than estimated. The 
intent of CSREES is to decrease burden to the plan-of-work respondents, 
and to extend the current plan-of-work cycle to include FY 2005 and FY 
2006. To make what is expected in the FY 2005-FY 2006 Plan of Work 
Update more clear, CSREES is making a change to the guidelines to 
indicate that it will only require a 5-to 10-page FY 2005-2006 Plan of 
Work Update which will allow the institutions to outline any changes 
and additions made to the FY 2000-FY 2004 5-Year Plan of Work currently 
in place. Any detailed information that the institution wants to 
address can be done in the Annual Report. However, we also will allow 
the institutions the option to submit a wholly new FY 2005-FY 2006 Plan 
of Work Update if it feels that it is in their best interest to do so.

Ways to Enhance the Quality, Utility, and Clarity of the Information to 
be Collected

    Comments received focused on aggregation and a standardized system 
for reporting.
    Comment: One commenter stated he looks forward to a more 
standardized and aggregated system in the future. Another commenter 
wants the Agency to work to clarify a list of outcomes/impacts that 
states could choose among to report against so data can be aggregated 
at the regional and national level.
    CSREES Response: CSREES agrees as it intends to have a more 
standardized

[[Page 6247]]

system in the future and will consider working to clarify a list of 
outcomes/impacts as it begins to develop the guidelines for the next 5-
Year Plan of Work which will begin with the FY 2007.
    Comment: One commenter suggested that the requirement to limit the 
reporting to programs supported by Federal dollars is the biggest 
hindrance to quality, causes an unnecessary burden on fiscal officers, 
and limits the results for which USDA might take credit. The commenter 
also suggested that an easy fix would be to allow states to report 
about programs that fit, regardless of funding source.
    CSREES Response: While CSREES agrees with this in principle, AREERA 
only requires that programs funded with formula funds be reported in 
the Plan of Work and Annual Report of Accomplishments and Results. 
Thus, CSREES can only require that institutions that receive Federal 
formula funds to report on programs that use Federal formula funds 
through the plan-of-work process.
    CSREES Comment: Another commenter questions the necessity of 
reporting on the manner in which research and extension activities are 
funded other than through Federal formula funds. This commenter also 
asks if AREERA only requires plans of work for the Federal formula 
funds distributed by CSREES, why are we burdening them to account for 
other funds.
    Response: CSREES disagrees as this information is required under 
section 202 of AREERA which amended both the Smith-Lever and Hatch Acts 
and states as one of its ``Requirements Related to the Plan of Work'': 
``(4) The manner in which research and extension, including research 
and extension activities funded other than through formula funds, will 
cooperate to address the critical issues in the State, including the 
activities to be carried out separately, the activities to be carried 
out sequentially, and the activities to be carried out jointly.''
    Comment: Another commenter stated that examples and materials 
posted on the CSREES Web site are quite helpful, and that feedback 
regarding planning and reporting is also helpful in moving planning and 
reporting toward a more outcomes-based effort. The commenter further 
stated that electronic platforms will further help users to assess 
component information more readily.
    CSREES Response: CSREES agrees and appreciates positive feedback 
where appropriate and will work on a more sophisticated electronic 
platform for the next 5-Year Plan of Work which is due to begin with FY 
2007.

Ways to Minimize the Burden of Collection of Information on Those Who 
Are to Respond, Including the Use of Appropriate Automated, Electronic, 
Mechanical, or Other Technological Collection Techniques or Other Forms 
of Information Technology

    Comment: Seven commenters supported the Agency notion to develop 
one standardized holistic electronic planning and reporting system for 
all its information needs, which the agency has named ``One-Solution.'' 
However, one commenter stated that the current method of reporting 
works well for their State.
    CSREES Response: Although the current free text format may work 
well for a few States, CSREES appreciates the support of the agency 
notion to develop a standardized holistic electronic planning and 
reporting system for all of its information needs. CSREES is committed 
to developing a more sophisticated holistic electronic system to reduce 
reporting burden.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    In accordance with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
regulations (5 CFR part 1320) that implement the Paperwork Reduction 
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 35), the information collection and 
recordkeeping requirements imposed by the implementation of these Final 
Guidelines will be submitted to OMB for approval. Those requirements 
will not become effective prior to OMB approval. The eligible 
institutions will be notified upon this approval.
    The public reporting burden for this collection of information 
contained in these guidelines is estimated at 336.9 hours per response 
for the FY 2005-FY 2006 Plan of Work Update and 1,356.3 hours per 
response for the Annual Report of Accomplishments and Results. This 
includes the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data 
sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and 
reviewing the collection of information. These guidelines have no 
additional impact on any existing data collection burden.
    Pursuant to the plan of work requirements enacted in the 
Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of 1998, the 
Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service hereby 
adds Part V, FY 2005-FY 2006 Plan of Work Update, to the Guidelines for 
State Plans of Work for Agricultural Research and Extension Formula 
Funds as follows:

Guidelines for State Plans of Work for Agricultural Research and 
Extension Formula Funds

Table of Contents

V. Submission of the FY 2005-2006 Plan of Work Update
    A. General
    1. Planning Option
    2. Period Covered
    3. Projected Resources
    4. Submission and Due Date
    5. Certification
    B. FY 2005-2006 Plan of Work Update Evaluation by CSREES
    1. Schedule
    2. Review Criteria

V. Submission of the FY 2005-FY 2006 Plan of Work Update

A. General

1. Planning Option
    The FY 2005-FY 2006 Plan of Work Update is a prospective plan that 
extends coverage of the original 5-Year Plan of Work (i.e., FY 2000-FY 
2004) to include FY 2005-FY 2006. CSREES requests, and will only 
require, this Plan of Work Update be limited to 5-10 pages and outline 
the changes and additions made to the original FY 2000-FY 2004 5-year 
Plan of Work. However, CSREES will also allow the institution the 
option to submit a wholly new FY 2005-2006 Plan of Work Update if they 
feel it is in their best interest to do so. The FY 2005-2006 Plan of 
Work Update should be prepared for an institution's individual 
functions (i.e., research or extension activities), for an individual 
institution (including the planning of research and extension 
activities), or for state-wide activities (a 5-year research and/or 
extension plan of work for all the eligible institutions in a State), 
as they were submitted in the original 5-Year Plan of Work that was due 
on July 15, 1999. Each FY 2005-FY 2006 Plan of Work Update must reflect 
the content of the program(s) funded by Federal agricultural research 
and extension formula funds and the required matching funds. This FY 
2005-FY 2006 Plan of Work Update must continue to describe not only how 
the program(s) address critical short-term, intermediate, and long-term 
agricultural issues in a State, but how it relates to and is part of 
the five broad national goals as outlined above and originally 
described in the previous 5-year plan of work, thus expanding upon and 
extending the existing plan with new or continuing efforts.
    The FY 2005-FY 2006 Plan of Work Update should continue to be based 
on the five original national goals

[[Page 6248]]

established in the FY 2000-FY 2004 5-year Plan of Work as described 
above.
2. Period Covered
    The FY 2005-FY 2006 Plan of Work Update will extend the current 5-
Year Plan of Work that covered the period from October 1, 1999, through 
September 30, 2004, to include the period from October 1, 2004, through 
September 30, 2006.
3. Projected Resources
    The resources that are allocated for various planned programs in 
the FY 2005-2006 Plan of Work Update, in terms of human and fiscal 
measures, should be included and projected to include the sixth and 
seventh years. The baseline for the institution's or State's initial 
plan (for the two years) should be the Federal agricultural research 
and extension formula funds for FY 1999 and the required level (i.e., 
percentage) of matching funds for FY 2005 and FY 2006.
4. Submission and Due Date
    The FY 2005-FY 2006 Plan of Work Update must be submitted by April 
1, 2004, to the Planning and Accountability Unit, Office of the 
Administrator of the Cooperative State Research, Education, and 
Extension Service; U.S. Department of Agriculture. It is preferred that 
these FY 2005-FY 2006 Plan of Work Updates be submitted electronically 
to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#accec4c9dbc5d8d8eccfdfdec9c9df82d9dfc8cd82cbc3da"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="94f6fcf1e3fde0e0d4f7e7e6f1f1e7bae1e7f0f5baf3fbe2">[email protected]</span></a> in either WordPerfect file format, Microsoft 
Word file format, or ASCII file format. It also is requested that the 
FY 2003 Annual Report of Accomplishments and Results be submitted with 
the FY 2005-FY 2006 Plan of Work Update in order to facilitate a more 
efficient and comprehensive review for both CSREES and the land-grant 
institutions.
5. Certification
    The FY 2005-FY 2006 Plan of Work Updates must be signed by the 1862 
Extension Director, 1862 Research Director, 1890 Extension 
Administrator, and/or 1890 Research Director, depending on the planning 
option chosen.

B. FY 2005-2006 Plan of Work Update Evaluation by CSREES

1. Schedule
    All FY 2005-FY 2006 Plan of Work Updates will be evaluated by 
CSREES in conjunction with the review of the FY 2003 Annual Report of 
Accomplishments and Results. The FY 2005-FY 2006 Plan of Work Update 
will either be accepted by CSREES without change or returned to the 
institution, with clear and detailed recommendations for its 
modification. The submitting institution(s) will be notified by CSREES 
of its determination within 90 days (review to be completed in 60 days, 
communications to the institutions allowing a 30-day response) of 
receipt of the document. Adherence to the Plan of Work schedule by the 
recipient institution is critical to assuring the timely allocation of 
funds by CSREES. The FY 2005-FY 2006 Plan of Work Updates accepted by 
CSREES will be in effect for the period beginning October 1, 2004, 
through September 30, 2006. CSREES will notify all institutions of a 
need for a new 5-year plan of work one year prior to the plan's 
expiration on September 30, 2006.
2. Review Criteria
    CSREES will evaluate the FY 2005-FY 2006 Plan of Work Update 
according to the criteria in these revised guidelines.

    Done in Washington, DC, this 30th day of January, 2004.
Colien Hefferan,
Administrator, Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension 
Service.
[FR Doc. 04-2786 Filed 2-9-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-22-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>