### 41028 Federal Register/ Vol. 78, No. 131 / Tuesday, July 9, 2013 / Notices

Submit all parts of the application at one time. Do not submit Letters of Commitment separately. No proposals will be accepted by facsimile machine. Use an 11-point font or larger. All forms and application template can be found
at http://www.na.fs.fed.us/werc under 2013 Statewide Wood Energy Teams.

A complete application includes the following items: 1. SWET Project Application, Part 1: Cooperator Contact Information 2. SWET Project Application, Part 2: Narrative Proposal and Program of Work 3. SWET Project Application, Part 3: Financial Forms A maximum of 11 pages per proposal for the items listed below will be accepted, (1) Qualifications and Summary Portfolio of Team Members (Limit 1.5 Pages)

• Include each team member’s name, affiliation, and years of experience in wood energy, including combustion technology, wood sourcing, financing, and community outreach.

• Describe outreach to underserved communities for participation or what has been done to incorporate participation from underserved communities.

• Include a description of prior working relationships and accomplishments as a team, including Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs), charters, or other formal agreements. (2) Project Narrative (3.5 Pages)

• Describe how the team will be managed and which individuals will fill which roles.

• Describe the team’s experience leveraging funds and its plan to leverage funds to support the team’s operation and achieve the required 1:1 match.

• Describe methods for selecting areas of focus (e.g. geographic clusters, business sectors or larger projects to be targeted).

• Describe methods for solicitation and selection of projects.

• Include the proposed geographic area where the team will work and the number of years requested for the agreement. (3) Program of Work (3.5 Pages)

• Describe statement of need and specific goals and objectives.

• Describe projected accomplishments and deliverables, including estimated number of systems planned, under construction, and installed.

• Describe communication and outreach activities that create social acceptance in communities where projects are targeted.

• Describe monitoring plan, including annual and final reports provided to agreement administrator, which will include summaries of community outreach activities, preliminary assessments, resource inventories, success stories, etc.

• Describe timeframe for activities described. (4) Budget Summary and Justification in Support of SF 424A (2 Pages)

• Address proposed expenditures in relation to the proposed program of work.

• Include cash and in kind match, other federal funds and staff time that may help accomplish the program ofwork, and fee structure for fee-forservices, if planned. (5) Project Outcomes, Annual Progress Reports and Final Reports (0.5 Pages)

• List anticipated project outcomes and accomplishments, as well as desired results.

• Describe types of reports, documents, and success stories that will be provided at the end of the project to be posted to the WERC Web site.

• Annual progress reports are required on an annual calendar year basis. The reports will provide an overview of accomplishments by goals and objectives included in the approved Cooperative Agreement narrative.

• A detailed final progress report is required and should include the following items:

Æ Final Summary Report—A brief overview of accomplishments by goals and objectives included in the approved Cooperative Agreement narrative.

Æ Final Accomplishment Report— includes various assessments, reports, case studies and related documents that resulted from project activities.

Final reports will be added to the WERC Statewide Wood Energy Team Web site

. 7. Appendices

The following information shall be included in appendices:

a. Letters of Commitment from Team Members or Institutions: Letters of commitment shall be included in an appendix and are intended to display willingness to participate in the wood energy team. These letters shall include commitments of cash or in-kind services from all those listed in the SF 424 and SF 424A. Each letter of support is limited to one page in length.

b. Documentation of Team Member or Institution Experience with Wood Energy: Additional information about team member or institutional experience with wood energy should be provided in this appendix.

c. Documentation of Formal Agreements, Charters, etc. (optional): Provide any written formal organizational framework that will guide the operation of the team such as MOUs, State Incorporation papers, or other instruments which establish the capacity and ability of the team to function and manage their actions.

d. Federal Funds: List all other Federal funds received for this Wood Energy Team within the last three years. List agency, program name, and dollar
amount.

e. Administrative Forms: SF 424, SF 424A, SF 424B and AD 1047, 1049, 3030 and certificate regarding lobbying activities are standard forms that shall be included in the application. These forms can be accessed at http:// www.na.fs.fed.us/werc under 2013 Statewide Wood Energy Teams.

Dated: July 1, 2013. James Hubbard, Deputy Chief, State and Private Forestry.
[FR Doc. 2013–16361 Filed 7–8–13; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 3410–11–P**

**COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS**

**Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Massachusetts Advisory**  **Committee**

Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission), and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), that a planning meeting of the Massachusetts Advisory Committee to the Commission will convene at 12:00 p.m. (ET) on Wednesday, July 24, 2013, at the McCarter and English Law Office, 265 Franklin Street, Boston, MA 02110. The purpose of the meeting is for project planning.

Members of the public are entitled to submit written comments. The comments must be received in the regional office by Monday, August 26, 2013. Comments may be mailed to the Eastern Regional Office, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, Suite 1150, Washington, DC 20425, faxed to (202) 376–7548, or emailed to ero@usccr.gov. Persons who desire additional information may contact the Eastern Regional Office at 202–376–7533.

Persons needing accessibility services should contact the Eastern Regional Office at least 10 working days before the scheduled date of the meeting.


### 41029 Federal Register/ Vol. 78, No. 131 / Tuesday, July 9, 2013 / Notices

Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced at the Eastern Regional Office, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Persons interested in the work of this advisory committee are advised to go to the Commission’s Web site,
www.usccr.gov, or to contact the Eastern Regional Office at the above phone number, email or street address.

The meetings will be conducted pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the Commission and FACA.

Dated in Washington, DC, on July 2, 2013. David Mussatt, Acting Chief, Regional Programs Coordination Unit.
[FR Doc. 2013–16336 Filed 7–8–13; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6335–01–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE**

**Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request** 

The Department of Commerce will submit to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for clearance the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35).

Agency: U.S. Census Bureau. Title: Generic Clearance for Questionnaire Pretesting Research.

OMB Control Number: 0607–0725. Form Number(s): Various. Type of Request: Extension of a currently approved collection.

Burden Hours: 16,500 over the next three years.

Number of Respondents: 5,500 annually.

Average Hours per Response: 1 hour. Needs and Uses: In recent years, there has been an increased interest among federal agencies and others in the importance of testing questionnaires. This interest has been spurred by a recognition that the traditional methods of pretesting are weak tools for evaluating questionnaires and procedures. These methods consist of a small ‘‘hothouse’’ field test accompanied by interviewer debriefing, and the information collected through their use is quite limited in its ability to detect and diagnose problems with the instruments and the procedures being tested.

In response to this recognition, new methods have come into popular use, which are useful for identifying questionnaire and procedural problems, suggesting solutions, and measuring the relative effectiveness of alternative solutions. Through the use of these kinds of techniques, employed routinely in the testing phase of Census Bureau surveys, questionnaires can be simplified for respondents, respondent burden can be reduced, and the quality of the questionnaires used in continuing and one-time surveys can be improved. Thus an increase in the quality of the data collected through these surveys can be achieved as well.

In September 1991, the Census Bureau requested and received a generic clearance (Number 0607–0725) on an experimental basis, which relaxed some of the time constraints and enabled the Census Bureau to begin conducting extended cognitive and questionnaire design research as part of testing for its censuses and surveys. The clearance covered data collections in the demographic, economic, and decennial areas of the Bureau, and specifically applied to research that is focused on questionnaire design and procedures aimed at reducing measurement errors in surveys. Research on paying respondents was specifically excluded from the clearance. As part of the experimental clearance, the Census Bureau submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a report that contained indicators of the work that was conducted under the clearance. At the end of the experimental period, the Census Bureau requested and received a three-year renewal of the clearance (through December 1995), covering the same kinds of research activities. As part of the clearance, the Census Bureau has submitted to OMB a report of pretesting activities at the end of each year of the clearance.

Subsequently, the Census Bureau has received six more three-year renewals of the generic clearance for pretesting (through August 2013). The current clearance contains approval for three additional types of activities: Research about incentives, expanded field tests conducted to include split sample questionnaire experiments in multiple panels, and usability testing of electronic instruments.

At this time, the Census Bureau is seeking another three-year renewal of the generic clearance for pretesting, with the same conditions as the previous clearance. This will enable the Census Bureau to continue providing support for pretesting activities, which is important given the length of time required to plan the activities.

The specific methods proposed for coverage by this clearance are described below. Also outlined are the procedures in place for keeping the Economics and Statistics Administration and OMB informed about the identity of the surveys and the nature of the research activities being conducted.

The methods proposed for use in questionnaire development are as follows:

Field test. For the purposes of this clearance, we are defining field tests as small data collection efforts of 500 cases or less, conducted among either purposive or statistically representative samples, for which evaluation of the questionnaire and/or procedures is the main objective and no plans to publish the data other than for purely methodological purposes are envisioned.

Field tests are an essential component of this clearance package because they serve as the vehicle for conducting standardized behavior coding of the interaction between the respondent and the interviewer. This methodology does not require any additional data collection above and beyond the field test—it involves applying a standardized coding scheme to the completion of a field interview, either by a coder using a tape-recording of the interview or by a ‘‘live’’ observer at the time of the interview. The coding scheme is designed to identify situations that occur during the interview that reflect problems with the questionnaire. For example, if respondents frequently interrupt the interviewer before the question is completed, the question may be too long. If respondents frequently give inadequate answers, this suggests there are some other problems with the question. Quantitative data derived from this type of standardized coding scheme can provide valuable information to identify problem areas in a questionnaire, and research (‘‘New Techniques for Pretesting Survey Questions’’ by Cannell, Kalton, Oksenberg, Bischoping, and Fowler, 1989) has demonstrated that this is a more objective and reliable method of identifying problems than the traditional interviewer debriefing, which is typically the sole tool used to evaluate the results of a traditional field
test.

Interviewer debriefing has advantages as well, since it utilizes the knowledge of the employees who have the closest contact with our respondents. In conjunction with other methods, we plan to use this method in our field tests to collect information about how interviewers react to the survey instruments.

Field tests conducted under this clearance will involve either purposive or statistically representative samples. Under this clearance a variety of surveys will be pretested, and the exact nature