This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains documents other than rules or

proposed rules that are applicable to the

public. Notices of hearings and investigations,

committee meetings, agency decisions and

rulings, delegations of authority, filing of

petitions and applications and agency

statements of organization and functions are

examples of documents appearing in this

section.

Notices Federal Register

20379 

Vol. 87, No. 67 

Thursday, April 7, 2022 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Research Service 

Notice of Intent To Seek OMB Approval 

To Collect Information: Forms 

Pertaining to the Scientific Peer 

Review 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 June 

6, 2022. 

ADDRESS: All comments concerning this 

notice should be directed to the Director 

& Program Coordinator listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 

Marquea D. King, Director & Program 

Coordinator, Office of Scientific Quality 

Review (OSQR); ARS, USDA; 5601 

Sunnyside Avenue, Beltsville, 

Maryland; 20705; Phone: 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 that will ensure the 

ARS efficiently manages data associated 

with the peer review of agricultural 

research. All forms are transferred and 

received electronically and may include 

on-line submission in the future. 

Abstract: The OSQR was established 

in September of 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 the USDA. The Office 

manages the ARS peer review system by 

centrally coordinating all of the 

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 2–5 ARS 

research projects. 

On average, 150 research projects are 

reviewed annually by an estimated 185 

reviewers; whereby approximately 130 

are reviewed by 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 prior to the reviewer’s 

involvement in the peer review process. 

This 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, diversity and 

inclusion data about the reviewer as 

well as information relevant to the 

paying of an honorarium and for travel, 

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. 

4. Additional Reviewer Comment 

Form—This form is supplied to 

members of a panel not assigned as a 

primary nor secondary reviewer on a 

particular project plan, however it 

encourages additional expert comments 

or recommendations for any plan 

regardless of the reviewers’ assignment 

as primary or secondary. 

5. Ad Hoc Review Form—USDA uses 

this in select cases (for Reviewers not 

participating in a panel review), a 

check-off listing of action classes at the 

end of the form allows them to provide 

an overall rating of the plan. 

6. Recommendations for ARS 

Research Project 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. 

7. 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 includes lodging, meals, and 

transportation expenses. When 

completed, the form contains sensitive 

information and is held in compliance 

with the ARS travel guidelines. This 

form is used only in the rare 

circumstance that a panel meeting 

requires travel of the participants. 

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 prior to the reviewer’s 

involvement in the peer review process. 

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. 

USDA’s collection of information on 

the Peer Review Form and Reviewer 

Comment Form is needed to guide the 

reviewer’s comments on the subject 

project. Both contain review guidance 

and space to insert comments. 

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. 

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. 

USDA’s collection of information on 

the Expense Report Form is needed to 

document a panel reviewer’s expenses 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
20380 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 67 / Thursday, April 7, 2022 / Notices 

incurred by attending a peer review 

meeting. The Expense Report includes 

lodging, meals, and transportation 

expenses. 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’s 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. 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). As the review page 

length varies. Reviewers 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. 

6. 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 the ARS. Annually, 

about 185 peer reviewers complete these 

forms. Most 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: 

Form Number of 

respondents Annual frequency 

Confidentiality Agreement .................................................................................................................... 185 1 per respondent (Total = 185). 

Peer Review Forms (required and assigned 2 plans) ......................................................................... 200 2 per panel respondent (Total = 400). 

Reviewer Comment Form (reviewer is not assigned as primary or secondary review) ..................... 6 2 per panel respondent (Total = 12). 

Expense Report (in-person reviewers) ................................................................................................ 6 1 per respondent (Total = 6). 

Panelist Information Forms .................................................................................................................. 185 1 per respondent/per form (Total = 185). 

Recommendations Form (non-online project reviews) ........................................................................ 82 2 per respondent (Total = 164). 

Estimated Total Annual Burden on 

Respondents: 

Form 

(time required to complete) 

Number 

completed 

annually 

Total burden 

(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 impacted 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. 

Simon Y. Liu, 

Associate Administrator, ARS. 

[FR Doc. 2022–07407 Filed 4–6–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–03–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Submission for OMB Review; Notice of 

Request for Emergency Approval 

In compliance with the requirements 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(PRA), the Department of Agriculture 

(USDA) has submitted a request to the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) for a 6-month emergency 

approval of the following information 

collection: ICR 0560–0307, Emergency 

Livestock Relief Program (ELRP). Due to 

the Notice of Funding Availability 

notice published on April 4, 2022, FSA 

received OMB approval for the 

Emergency Request to allow FSA to 

begin distributing payments under the 

ELRP to eligible livestock producers 

who faced increased supplemental feed 

costs as a result of forage losses due to 

a qualifying drought or wildfire in 

calendar year 2021. 

Farm Service Agency 

Title: Emergency Livestock Relief 

Program. 

OMB Control Number: 0560–0307. 

Summary of Collection: The Farm 

Service Agency (FSA) is requested 

emergency clearance and review 

through 5 CFR 1320.13 for a new 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES