4100 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 25, 2006 / Notices 

be unable to determine if the 

organization qualifies for loan 

assistance. 

Description of Respondents: Not-forprofit institutions; State, local or tribal 

government. 

Number of Respondents: 6. 

Frequency of Responses: 

Recordkeeping; Reporting: On occasion. 

Total Burden Hours: 36. 

Charlene Parker, 

Departmental Information Collection 

Clearance Officer. 

[FR Doc. E6–861 Filed 1–24–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–XT–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

[Docket Number FV–06–302] 

United States Standards for Grades of 

Sweet Cherries 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Agricultural Marketing 

Service (AMS), prior to undertaking 

research and other work associated with 

revising official grade standards, is 

soliciting comments on the possible 

revisions of the United States Standards 

for Grades of Sweet Cherries. At a 2003 

meeting with the Fruit and Vegetable 

Industry Advisory Committee, AMS was 

asked to review the Fresh Fruit and 

Vegetable grade standards for usefulness 

in serving the industry. As a result AMS 

has identified row sizes for possible 

inclusion into the sweet cherries grade 

standards. Additionally, AMS is seeking 

comments regarding any other revisions 

that may be necessary to better serve the 

industry. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

March 27, 2006. 

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are 

invited to submit written comments to 

the Standardization Section, Fresh 

Products Branch, Fruit and Vegetable 

Programs, Agricultural Marketing 

Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

1400 Independence Ave. SW., Room 

1661 South Building, Stop 0240, 

Washington, DC 20250–0240; Fax (202) 

720–8871, E-mail 

FPB.DocketClerk@usda.gov. Comments 

should make reference to the dates and 

page number of this issue of the Federal 

Register and will be made available for 

public inspection in the above office 

during regular business hours. The 

United States Standards for Grades of 

Sweet Cherries are available either at 

the above address or by accessing the 

AMS, Fresh Products Branch Web site 

at: http://www.ams.usda.gov/standards/ 

stanfrfv.htm. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Cheri L. Emery, at the above address or 

call (202) 720–2185; E-mail 

Cheri.Emery@usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 

203(c) of the Agricultural Marketing Act 

of 1946 (7 U.S.C. 1621–1627), as 

amended, directs and authorizes the 

Secretary of Agriculture ‘‘To develop 

and improve standards of quality, 

condition, quantity, grade and 

packaging and recommend and 

demonstrate such standards in order to 

encourage uniformity and consistency 

in commercial practices.’’ AMS is 

committed to carrying out this authority 

in a manner that facilitates the 

marketing of agricultural commodities. 

AMS makes copies of official standards 

available upon request. The United 

States Standards for Grades of Fruits 

and Vegetables not connected with 

Federal Marketing Orders or U.S. Import 

Requirements no longer appear in the 

Code of Federal Regulations, but are 

maintained by USDA/AMS/Fruit and 

Vegetable Programs. 

AMS is proposing to revise the 

voluntary United States Standards for 

Grades of Sweet Cherries using 

procedures that appear in Part 36, Title 

7 of the Code of Federal Regulations (7 

CFR part 36). These standards were 

published on May 7, 1971. 

Background 

At a 2003 meeting with the Fruit and 

Vegetable Industry Advisory Committee, 

AMS was asked to review the Fresh 

Fruit and Vegetable grade standards for 

usefulness in serving the industry. AMS 

has identified the United States 

Standards for Grades of Sweet Cherries 

for possible revision. AMS is 

considering incorporating a standard 

row size into the standards. This row 

size would correspond with current row 

sizes being used by the industry. 

However, prior to undertaking detailed 

work to develop the proposed revision 

to the standards, AMS is soliciting 

comments on the proposed revision and 

any other comments on the United 

States Standards for Grades of Sweet 

Cherries to better serve the industry. 

This notice provides for a 60-day 

comment period for interested parties to 

comment on whether any changes are 

necessary to the standards. Should AMS 

conclude that there is a need for any 

revisions of the standards, the proposed 

revisions will be published in the 

Federal Register with a request for 

comments in accordance with 7 CFR 

part 36. 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1621–1627. 

Dated: January 19, 2006. 

Lloyd C. Day, 

Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. E6–862 Filed 1–24–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Commodity Credit Corporation 

Notice of Change to Address for Hand 

Delivery of 2006 Applications to the 

Market Development Programs, 

Technical Assistance for Specialty 

Crops (TASC); Quality Samples 

Program (QSP); Market Access 

Program (MAP); Foreign Market 

Development Program (FMD); and 

Emerging Markets Program (EMP) 

Reference Original Federal Register Notice 

Publication Dates and Catalog of Federal 

Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Numbers: 

TASC—70 FR 76230, December 23, 2005, 

CFDA 10.604; QSP—70 FR 76742, December 

28, 2005, CFDA 10.605; MAP—70 FR 76740, 

December 28, 2005, CFDA 10.601; FMD—70 

FR 76738, December 28, 2005, CFDA 10.600; 

and EMP—70 FR 76735, December 28, 2005, 

CFDA 10.603. 

SUMMARY: The Commodity Credit 

Corporation is notifying the public of a 

change in address for hand delivery 

(including FedEx, DHL, UPS, etc.) of 

applications for the programs referenced 

above. Deliver to: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Foreign Agricultural 

Service, Marketing Operations Staff, 

1400 Independence Ave., SW., Room 

4932 South Building, Washington, DC 

20250–1042. 

DATES: All applications for the TASC 

program for the February 1 deadline 

must be received by 5 p.m. eastern 

standard time February 1, 2006. All 

applications for the QSP, MAP, FMD, 

and EMP programs must be received by 

5 p.m. eastern standard time, March 13, 

2006. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Entities wishing to apply for funding 

assistance should contact the Marketing 

Operations Staff, Foreign Agricultural 

Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

1400 Independence Ave., SW., STOP 

1042, Washington, DC 20250–1042, 

phone: (202) 720–4327, fax: (202) 720–

9361, e-mail: mosadmin@fas.usda.gov. 

Information is also available on the 

Foreign Agricultural Service Web site at 

http://www.fas.usda.gov/mos/ 

marketdev.asp. 


wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 25, 2006 / Notices 4101 

Signed at Washington, DC, on January 18, 

2006. 

A. Ellen Terpstra, 

Administrator, Foreign Agricultural Service 

and Vice President, Commodity Credit 

Corporation. 

[FR Doc. 06–679 Filed 1–24–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–10–M 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Cooperative State Research, 

Education, and Extension Service Final 

Revised 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 landgrant institutions and 1890 land-grant 

institutions, including Tuskegee 

University and West Virginia State 

University. CSREES also is revising and 

reinstating a previously approved 

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; CSREES–USDA; 

Washington, DC 20250; at 202–720–

5623, 202–720–7714 (fax) or via 

electronic mail at 

bhewitt@csrees.usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: CSREES 

published a notice and request for 

comment on the Proposed Revised 

Guidelines for State Plans of Work for 

the Agricultural Research and Extension 

Formula Funds in the Federal Register 

on June 7, 2005 (70 FR 33055–33062). 

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 collections techniques or 

other forms of information technology. 

CSREES received 22 sets of 

comments. 

Burden 

Comment: Half of the commentors 

(11) stated that the number of burden 

hours required is underestimated. One 

commentor stated that the number of 

burden hours required is overestimated. 

And one commentor stated that the 

number of burden hours appeared to be 

reasonable estimates. The other nine 

commentors had no comment on burden 

hours required. 

CSREES Response: CSREES fully 

expected that half of the commentors 

would indicate that the number of 

burden hours was underestimated. 

CSREES contacted nine states for a 

burden survey based on the proposed 

guidelines. Seven States responded. We 

asked these states to complete the 

survey giving the estimated number of 

hours it will take to complete each 

portion of the Plan of Work (POW) and 

Annual Report, above and beyond the 

number of hours it would normally take 

to plan and report for their own State’s 

purposes. The number represented in 

the guidelines is based on the median of 

the results of this survey, and based on 

a per institutional response. Thus, half 

of the responses are at or below this 

figure and half of the responses are at or 

above this figure. Also, since this 

number is based on each individual 

institutional response, it must be 

understood that a combined research 

institution and extension institution 

cooperating on a POW is considered to 

be two responses and is, thus, expected 

to be double this published figure since 

it represents two institutional responses. 

It also is significant to note that none of 

the states surveyed which were below 

this median estimate commented that 

the burden hours were underestimated. 

Comment: One commentor stated that 

quantifying inputs would be overly 

burdensome. 

CSREES Response: While quantifying 

inputs does put some burden on the 

States, it is necessary to report to 

Congress and the Office of Management 

and Budget what impacts are generated 

by what dollars. To reduce the burden 

on the states, CSREES will only ask for 

the types of funds used, and the 

estimated number of Full-Time 

Equivalents (FTEs) in the initial POW. 

Actual numbers on these will be asked 

in the Annual Report. 

Hatch Act Funding 

Comment: One commentor felt that 

there is no need for the Hatch Act 

anymore and that the budget should be 

cut. Moreover, this commentor stated 

that all research should be funded by 

agribusiness. 

CSREES Response: CSREES 

appreciates and accepts all comments. 

However, this comment is beyond the 

scope of these Guidelines. 

Due Date 

Comment: Three commentors noted 

that the period covered in the 

Guidelines appears incorrect. The 

Guidelines state October 1, 2007, 

through September 30, 2011. 

CSREES Response: CSREES agrees. 

The period should read October 1, 2006, 

through September 30, 2011. This is 

corrected in the final Guidelines. 

Comment: Nine commentors state that 

the April 1, 2006, deadline for 

submitting the POW will be difficult to 

meet. One commentor suggests that 

having the Annual Report and POW 

submitted 60 days apart from each other 

would be less burdensome. 

CSREES Response: CSREES needs to 

have 90 days to review and approve the 

POWs before funds can be released for 

the first quarter of fiscal year (FY) 2007. 

CSREES agrees to move the initial due 

date for the FY 2007–2011 POW to June 

1, 2006. However, if any State 

institution does not submit their Plan by 

June 1, 2006, CSREES cannot guarantee 

prompt release of the first quarter funds 

for FY 2007 on October 1, 2006, since 

it can only do so with an approved 

POW. The due dates for the subsequent 

Annual Report of Accomplishments and 

the Annual Plan of Work Update will 

remain April 1 each year. 

Elements of the Planned Programs 

Section 

Comment: Two commentors suggest 

that while the Program Logic Model is 


wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES