Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 131 / Monday, July 11, 2022 / Notices 41097 

technology are made that could affect 

measurement results, the manufacturer 

should inform AMS in writing to 

determine the significance. In addition, 

if the manufacturer finds that the 

technology is not meeting AMS 

performance criteria, they should 

immediately inform AMS. Failure to 

inform AMS, may result in cancellation 

of the COC. 

Evaluation Criteria 

Need. AMS assesses the need 

criterion through a review of the 

manufacturer-provided information, 

input from stakeholders including the 

Grain Inspection Advisory Committee, 

and from internal information. AMS 

evaluates the demand for the testing 

technology from AMS customers and 

stakeholders and compares the demand 

to the costs of providing the testing 

service, including standardization, 

calibration, and quality control efforts. 

AMS recommends that manufacturers 

provide information from a market 

assessment of the technology that 

supports this demand. For existing 

inspection factors, a successful 

technology should be compatible with 

existing official procedures such as 

subsample size requirements. For a test 

factor with an existing single approved 

instrument model, a successful new 

instrument should offer an added 

benefit to official inspection and 

provide results in terms of accuracy that 

are equivalent to, or better than the 

currently approved instrument model. If 

pertinent, manufacturers should provide 

national or international regulatory 

requirements the technology addresses. 

This may include, but is not limited to, 

maximum levels for toxic substances. 

Accuracy and Quality Control. 

Manufacturers should provide relevant 

data that support both the accuracy and 

quality control criteria. Manufacturers 

and other interested parties are 

encouraged to review the specific 

requirements and additional technical 

information at [insert hyperlink to 

technical document]. 

Automation. If the technology 

generates an electronic result, the 

manufacturer should provide 

procedures for automatic data capture 

and the method to modify the output. 

Testing Time. Manufacturers should 

provide the estimated testing time 

required from sample receipt to final 

result. The testing time will be assessed 

by comparison to existing or similar 

technologies. Longer testing times 

should be justified by providing a 

significant advantage over existing 

technology. 

Testing Cost. The manufacturer 

should provide itemized cost estimates 

for the technology, maintenance, 

consumables, and all materials and 

equipment needed to perform the test. 

AMS evaluates the estimated costs of 

the recommended quality control, 

calibration, and standardization 

procedures. The testing cost is 

compared to existing or similar 

technologies. Higher testing costs 

should provide significant advantages 

over existing technologies. 

Melissa R. Bailey, 

Associate Administrator, Agricultural 

Marketing Service. 

[FR Doc. 2022–14671 Filed 7–8–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Submission for OMB Review; 

Comment Request 

The Department of Agriculture will 

submit the following information 

collection requirement(s) to OMB for 

review and clearance under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 

Public Law 104–13 on or after the date 

of publication of this notice. Comments 

are requested regarding: (1) whether the 

collection of information is necessary 

for the proper performance of the 

functions of the agency, including 

whether the information will have 

practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the 

agency’s estimate of burden including 

the validity of the methodology and 

assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance 

the quality, utility and clarity of the 

information to be collected; and (4) 

ways to minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on those who 

are to respond, including through the 

use of appropriate automated, 

electronic, mechanical, or other 

technological collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology. 

Comments regarding these 

information collections are best assured 

of having their full effect if received by 

August 10, 2022. Written comments and 

recommendations for the proposed 

information collection should be 

submitted, identified by docket number 

0535–0264, within 30 days of the 

publication of this notice by any of the 

following methods: 

• Email: ombofficer@nass.usda.gov. 

Include docket number above in the 

subject line of the message. 

• E-fax: 855–838–6382. 

• Mail: Mail any paper, disk, or CD– 

ROM submissions to: Richard Hopper, 

NASS Clearance Officer, U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Room 5336 

South Building, 1400 Independence 

Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250– 

2024. 

• Hand Delivery/Courier: Hand 

deliver to: Richard Hopper, NASS 

Clearance Officer, U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Room 5336 South Building, 

1400 Independence Avenue SW, 

Washington, DC 20250–2024. 

An agency may not conduct or 

sponsor a collection of information 

unless the collection of information 

displays a currently valid OMB control 

number and the agency informs 

potential persons who are to respond to 

the collection of information that such 

persons are not required to respond to 

the collection of information unless it 

displays a currently valid OMB control 

number. 

National Agricultural Statistics Service 

(NASS) 

Title: Land Leasing Survey in 

Oklahoma. 

OMB Control Number: 0535–0264. 

Summary of Collection: The primary 

objectives of the National Agricultural 

Statistics Service (NASS) are to prepare 

and issue official State and national 

estimates of crop and livestock 

production, disposition and prices, 

economic statistics, and environmental 

statistics related to agriculture and to 

conduct the Census of Agriculture and 

its follow-on surveys. NASS will 

conduct a survey of agricultural 

operations in Oklahoma. Selected 

farmers will be asked to provide data on 

rent & acreage as well as form of the 

lease agreement for operations with the 

following lease agreements: (1) cash rent 

for selected crops, (2) share rent, (3) 

pasture leases, winter grazing, and 

recreational leases. General authority for 

these data collection activities is granted 

under U.S.C. Title 7, Section 2204. 

Need and Use of the Information: 

Oklahoma State University, as well as 

many farmers and ranchers in 

Oklahoma, have been interested in land 

rental rates for agricultural operations in 

greater detail than what is provided in 

the Cash Rents and Leases Survey used 

to satisfy the requirement originally 

specified in the 2008 Farm Bill and 

conducted under Office of Management 

and Budget approval number 0535– 

0002. 

To assist producers with this data 

need, the Oklahoma State University, 

Department of Agricultural Economics 

(OSU–DAE), has been collecting and 

publishing statistical estimates 

biennially for more than 30 years— 

before USDA–NASS was tasked with 

the Cash Rents County Estimates. The 

OSU–DAE obtained statistics to assist 

producers in making sound rental 

agreements. Due to the diverse nature of 

the state, OSU–DAE felt it necessary to 

provide more descriptive land breakouts 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
41098 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 131 / Monday, July 11, 2022 / Notices 

such as pasture estimates into native 

pasture and improved pasture due to 

large price differences and input costs 

associated with each type of pasture. 

A data request highlighted this limit: 

A data user (landlord) was trying to renegotiate the rental rate with their lessee 

on a large amount of Bermuda grass 

pastureland. They were given the 

pasture rate from the USDA–NASS 2017 

Cash Rents Survey for the county ($10/ 

ac), district ($12/ac), and the State ($13/ 

ac). The data user was able to find the 

OSU–DAE pasture rates for 2016/2017 

for Bermuda (Improved Pasture) in his 

Region ($24.55) and at the State level 

($22.79). The data user would have lost 

$12 to $14/per acre if used only the 

USDA–NASS Cash Rents Survey data 

alone. 

Description of Respondents: Farmers 

and ranchers in Oklahoma. 

Number of Respondents: 2,700. 

Frequency of Responses: Reporting: 

One a year. 

Total Burden Hours: 1,022. 

Levi S. Harrell, 

Departmental Information Collection 

Clearance Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2022–14660 Filed 7–8–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–20–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Animal and Plant Health Inspection 

Service 

[Docket No. APHIS–2014–0062] 

Privacy Act of 1974; System of 

Records 

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Notice of a new system of 

records. 

SUMMARY: The Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service proposes to add a 

system of records to its inventory of 

records systems subject to the Privacy 

Act of 1974, as amended. The system of 

records is the Smuggling Interdiction 

and Trade Compliance (SITC) National 

Information Communication Activity 

System (SNICAS), USDA/APHIS–21. 

This notice is necessary to meet the 

requirements of the Privacy Act to 

publish in the Federal Register notice of 

the existence and character of record 

systems maintained by the agency. 

DATES: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 

552a(e)(4) and (11), this notice is 

applicable upon publication, subject to 

a 30-day notice and comment period in 

which to comment on the routine uses 

described below. Please submit any 

comments by August 10, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by either of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Enter 

APHIS–2014–0062 in the Search field. 

Select the Documents tab, then select 

the comment button in the list of 

documents. 

• Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: 

Send your comment to Docket No. 

APHIS–2014–0062, Regulatory Analysis 

and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 

3A–03.8, 4700 River Road Unit 118, 

Riverdale, MD 20737–1238. 

Supporting documents and any 

comments we receive on this docket 

may be viewed at http://

www.regulations.gov or in our reading 

room, which is located in room 1620 of 

the USDA South Building, 14th Street 

and Independence Avenue SW, 

Washington, DC. Normal reading room 

hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except holidays. To be 

sure someone is there to help you, 

please call (202) 799–7039 before 

coming. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

general questions, please contact Mr. 

Kristian Rondeau, Director Field 

Operations, District 6, 2150 Centre 

Avenue, Building B, Fort Collins, CO 

80526; (970) 494–7563. For Privacy Act 

questions concerning this system of 

records notice, please contact Ms. Tonya 

Woods, Director, Freedom of 

Information and Privacy Act Staff, 4700 

River Road Unit 50, Riverdale, MD 

20737; (301) 851–4076; email: 

APHISPrivacy@usda.gov. For USDA 

Privacy Act questions, please contact 

the USDA Chief Privacy Officer, 

Information Security Center, Office of 

Chief Information Officer, USDA, Jamie 

L. Whitten Building, 1400 

Independence Ave. SW, Washington, 

DC 20250; email: USDAPrivacy@

usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant 

to the provisions of the Privacy Act of 

1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), notice is given that 

the Animal and Plant Health Inspection 

Service (APHIS) of the U.S. Department 

of Agriculture (USDA) is proposing to 

add a new system of records, entitled 

USDA/APHIS–21, Smuggling 

Interdiction and Trade Compliance 

(SITC) National Information 

Communication Activity System 

(SNICAS), to maintain a record of 

activities conducted by the agency 

pursuant to its mission and 

responsibilities authorized by the Plant 

Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 7701 et seq.); 

the Animal Health Protection Act (7 

U.S.C. 8301 et seq.); and the Honey Bee 

Act (7 U.S.C. 281 et seq.). The purpose 

of the system is to record data and 

information about APHIS’ SITC 

activities nationwide. SITC is within 

APHIS’ Plant Protection and Quarantine 

program. 

SNICAS supports the mission of SITC 

programs by providing, to SITC and 

other agency personnel, information 

that can be used to assist with detecting 

and preventing the unlawful entry and 

distribution into the United States of 

prohibited and/or non-compliant 

products that may harbor exotic plant 

and animal pests, diseases, or invasive 

species. SITC focuses on anti-smuggling 

and trade compliance efforts at ports of 

entry in the United States and in 

commerce to prevent the establishment 

of plant and animal pests and diseases, 

while maintaining the safety of U.S. 

ecosystems and natural resources. SITC 

is responsible for collecting, 

maintaining, and reviewing information 

to successfully and efficiently meet its 

mission. 

SNICAS consists of a web-based 

system and paper records and contains 

information related to commodities that 

have been physically inspected and/or 

surveyed by SITC. The system contains 

records pertaining to U.S. ports of entry 

and commerce locations that are 

inspected or surveyed during daily 

operations. SNICAS also maintains and 

communicates information associated 

with SITC operational and 

administrative activities. 

SITC officials use the information in 

SNICAS to identify and close pathways 

used for the introduction of prohibited 

commodities and those regulated 

commodities that lack the necessary 

certificates and permits to enter into 

U.S. commerce. SITC officials also use 

SNICAS to perform activities such as 

legal and regulatory actions; scientific 

research; risk, trend, pathway and 

targeting analyses; trade support; 

administrative and budgetary support; 

supervision and program management; 

and overall decision support services. 

Additionally, SITC officials use SNICAS 

to generate reports to evaluate the risk 

status of the commercial sites where 

regulated commodities are seized, the 

effectiveness of the program, and quality 

control of the data. 

APHIS will share information from 

the system pursuant to the requirements 

of the Privacy Act and, in the case of its 

routine uses, when the disclosure is 

compatible with the purpose for which 

the information was compiled. 

However, APHIS proposes to exempt 

some records in the system from certain 

Privacy Act requirements in accordance 

with 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2). APHIS 

proposes to exempt the system from 

Privacy Act requirements including 

subsections (c)(3); (d); (e)(1); (e)(4)(G), 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES