Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 14 / Friday, January 22, 2010 / Notices 3697 

questions may be directed to the 

meeting planner, Crystal Tyler, at 202– 

314–4701. Registration must include 

name, affiliation, phone number or email, and days attending. Following preregistration, individuals will receive a 

confirmation of registration via e-mail 

with instructions on how to access the 

Webinar and check for computer 

compatibility. Please call Crystal Tyler 

at 202–314–4701 by 5 p.m. E.S.T. on 

February 3, 2010 should you require 

assistance or any special 

accommodations. Members of the public 

who are unable to access the Internet in 

order to attend the Webinar may contact 

Crystal Tyler at 202–314–4710 by 5 p.m. 

E.S.T. on February 3, 2010 for assistance 

to the extent reasonably practicable. 

Written Comments: By this notice, the 

Committee is soliciting submission of 

written comments, views, information 

and data pertinent to the review of the 

Dietary Guidelines for Americans. 

Written comments are encouraged to be 

submitted electronically at http:// 

www.DietaryGuidelines.gov. A ‘‘submit 

comments’’ button is available for access 

to the public comments database. 

Lengthy comments (that exceed 2000 

characters) or support materials can be 

uploaded as an attachment. Multiple 

attachments must be ‘‘zip-filed’’. 

Comments not submitted electronically 

can be mailed, faxed, or delivered to: 

Carole Davis, Co-Executive Secretary of 

the Dietary Guidelines Advisory 

Committee, Center for Nutrition Policy 

and Promotion, U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, 3101 Park Center Drive, 

Room 1034, Alexandria, VA 22302, 

703–305–7600 (telephone), 703–305– 

3300 (fax). All comments for this 

meeting must be received by 5 p.m. 

E.S.T. on February 3, 2010 and will 

become part of the public comments 

database. Comments are welcome 

throughout the Committee’s 

deliberations. 

Public Documents: Documents 

pertaining to Committee deliberations 

will be available for public viewing 

from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. E.S.T., 

Monday through Friday (except Federal 

holidays), at the Reference Desk of the 

National Agricultural Library, USDA/ 

ARS, 10301 Baltimore Avenue, 

Beltsville, MD 20705. The Reference 

Desk telephone phone number is 301– 

504–5755; however, no advance 

appointment is necessary. Meeting 

materials (i.e., agenda, meeting minutes, 

and transcript), once available, can be 

found at http:// 

www.DietaryGuidelines.gov. 

Dated: December 14, 2009. 

Rajen S. Anand, 

Executive Director, Center for Nutrition Policy 

and Promotion, U.S. Department of 

Agriculture. 

Dated: December 17, 2009. 

Edward B. Knipling, 

Administrator, Agricultural Research Service, 

U.S. Department of Agriculture. 

Penelope Slade-Sawyer, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Health 

(Disease Prevention and Health Promotion), 

U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services. 

[FR Doc. 2010–1206 Filed 1–21–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–30–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

National Institute of Food and 

Agriculture 

Solicitation of Nomination of 

Veterinary Shortage Situations for the 

Veterinary Medicine Loan Repayment 

Program (VMLRP) 

AGENCY: National Institute of Food and 

Agriculture, USDA. 

ACTION: Notice and solicitation for 

nominations. 

SUMMARY: The National Institute of Food 

and Agriculture (NIFA) is soliciting 

nominations for veterinary service 

shortage situations for the Veterinary 

Medicine Loan Repayment Program 

(VMLRP; [74 FR 32788–32798]), as 

authorized under the National 

Veterinary Medical Services Act 

(NVMSA), 7 U.S.C. 3151a. This Notice 

initiates a 45-day nomination 

solicitation period and prescribes the 

procedures and criteria to be used by 

State, Insular Area, DC and Federal 

Lands (hereafter referred to as State(s)) 

Animal Health Officials (SAHO) in 

order to nominate veterinary shortage 

situations. All States are eligible to 

submit nominations, up to the 

maximum indicated for each State in 

this notice. NIFA is conducting this 

solicitation of veterinary shortage 

situation nominations under previously 

approved information collection (OMB 

Control Number 0524–0046). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary 

Sherman; National Program Leader, 

Veterinary Science; National Institute of 

Food and Agriculture; U.S. Department 

of Agriculture; STOP 2220; 1400 

Independence Avenue, SW.; 

Washington, DC 20250–2220; Voice: 

202–401–4952; Fax: 202–401–6156; Email: gsherman@nifa.usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background and Purpose 

In recent years, a number of studies 

have been conducted to investigate 

national veterinary workforce needs in 

different veterinary sectors including 

private practice, public practice (local, 

State, and Federal service), military 

service, research, public health, food 

safety and other specialty disciplines. 

Major studies include two National 

Academies of Science (NAS) reports, 

Animal Health at the Crossroads: 

Preventing, Detecting, and Diagnosing 

Animal Diseases and Critical Needs for 

Research in Veterinary Science, a third 

pending NAS committee report, 

Assessing the Current and Future 

Workforce Needs in Veterinary 

Medicine, which is currently under final 

review, and a 2009 GAO Federal 

Veterinary Work Force report, 

VETERINARIAN WORKFORCE: Actions 

Are Needed to Ensure Sufficient 

Capacity for Protecting Public and 

Animal Health. These studies, taken 

together with a number of smaller 

assessments of veterinary workforce 

needs conducted by various 

professional associations, indicate 

shortages of veterinarians exist in nearly 

all sectors and many of these shortages 

will worsen without enhancement of 

resources, facilities, incentives, and 

novel recruiting and educational 

strategies. 

A landmark series of three peerreviewed studies published in 2007 in 

the Journal of the American Veterinary 

Medical Association (JAVMA), and 

sponsored by the Food Supply 

Veterinary Medicine Coalition (http:// 

www.avma.org/fsvm/recognition.asp), 

gave considerable attention to the 

growing shortage of food supply 

veterinarians, the causes of shortages in 

this sector, and the consequences to the 

US food safety infrastructure and to the 

general public if this trend continues to 

worsen. Food supply veterinary 

medicine embraces a broad array of 

veterinary professional activities, 

specialties and responsibilities, and is 

defined as the full range of veterinary 

medical practices contributing to the 

production of a safe and wholesome 

food supply and to animal, human, and 

environmental health. However, the 

privately practicing food animal 

veterinary practitioner population 

within the US is, numerically, the 

largest, and arguably the most important 

single component of the food supply 

veterinary medical sector. Food animal 

veterinarians, working closely with 

livestock producers and State and 

Federal officials, constitute the first line 

of defense against spread of endemic 

and zoonotic diseases, introduction of 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
3698 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 14 / Friday, January 22, 2010 / Notices 

high consequence foreign animal 

diseases, and other threats to the health 

and wellbeing of both animals and 

humans that consume animal products. 

Among the most alarming findings of 

the Coalition-sponsored studies was 

objective confirmation that insufficient 

numbers of veterinary students are 

selecting food supply veterinary 

medical careers. This development has 

led both to current shortages and to 

projections for worsening shortages over 

the next 10 years. While there were 

many reasons students listed for opting 

not to choose a career in food animal 

practice or other food supply veterinary 

sectors, chief among the reasons was 

concern over burdensome educational 

debt. According to a survey of 

veterinary medical graduates conducted 

by the American Veterinary Medical 

Association (AVMA) in the spring of 

2009, the average educational debt for 

students graduating from veterinary 

school is approximately $130,000. Such 

debt loads incentivize students to select 

other veterinary careers, such as 

companion animal medicine, which 

tend to be more financially lucrative 

and, therefore, enable students to more 

quickly repay their outstanding 

educational loans. Furthermore, when 

this issue was studied in the Coalition 

report from the perspective of 

identifying solutions to this workforce 

imbalance, panelists were asked to rate 

18 different strategies for addressing 

shortages. Responses from the panelists 

overwhelmingly showed that student 

debt repayment and scholarship 

programs were the most important 

strategies in addressing future shortages 

(JAVMA 229:57–69). 

Public Comments and Solicitation 

Notice Changes in Response 

On July 9, 2009, NIFA published a 

Federal Register Notice [74 FR 32788– 

32798] with request for comment on the 

VMLRP Interim Rule, which included, 

in part, general procedures for 

designation of veterinary shortage 

situations. 

NIFA invited public comment on the 

VMLRP Interim Rule, which included a 

description of the process for 

solicitation of nomination of veterinary 

shortage situations. NIFA received 

seven sets of comments relating to the 

nomination solicitation process. 

Comment: Three commentors 

suggested that the State Animal Health 

Official be required to consult with the 

State Veterinary Association and other 

interested parties within the State when 

identifying underserved areas within a 

State. 

NIFA Response: We strongly 

recommend that State Animal Health 

Officials involve other leading animal 

health experts in the nomination 

process as they identify underserved 

areas within their respective States. 

Comment: One commentor expressed 

concern that low density agricultural 

areas will be regarded as less important 

than areas of heavily concentrated 

agriculture. 

Comment: One commentor 

recommended that representatives of 

Federal agencies be included on an 

official review panel. 

NIFA Response: NIFA will take these 

comments into consideration as it 

develops the solicitation for 

nominations for veterinarian shortage 

situations and implements the review 

panel. 

Comment: One commentor urged 

USDA to examine the feasibility of 

establishing an indexing system 

whereby each shortage situation that is 

designated is awarded a weighted score 

for severity of shortage. 

NIFA Response: As with other review 

processes conducted by NIFA, the 

review panel will evaluate the 

composite qualitative and quantitative 

arguments presented in the submitted 

nomination packages against criteria 

described elsewhere in this notice. The 

panel will classify each shortage 

situation as either ‘‘Recommended for 

designation’’ or ‘‘Not recommended for 

designation’’. 

Comment: One commentor suggested 

that solicitation notices be published on 

an annual basis instead of a biennial 

basis. Another commentor requested 

clarification on the frequency of the 

need to apply for the designation of 

shortage areas and the need to reassess 

a designation once it is filled by a 

veterinarian enrolled in the VMLRP. 

NIFA Response: NIFA presumes that, 

over time, the shortage situation 

priorities of a State will change due to 

veterinarians relocating to fill critical 

areas designated by the VMLRP. NIFA 

will also be mindful of spontaneous 

shifts in perceived threats to animal 

health in time and space. To address 

changing conditions, NIFA program 

staff will assess the relative demand for 

reprioritization of shortage situation 

distribution within the States on an 

annual basis. However, NIFA reserves 

the right to conduct this solicitation on 

a biennial basis to save administrative 

costs and to adhere to the aggressive 

annual program schedule and/or to 

respond to funding fluctuations. 

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 guidelines 

have been approved by OMB Control 

Number 0524–0046. 

List of Subjects in Guidelines for 

Veterinary Shortage Situation 

Nominations 

I. Preface and Authority 

II. Nomination of Veterinary Shortage 

Situations 

A. General 

1. Eligible Shortage Situations 

2. Authorized Respondents and Use of 

Consultation 

3. Rationale for Capping Nominations and 

State Allocation Method 

4. State Allocation of Nominations 

5. Period Covered 

6. Submission and Due Date 

7. Definitions 

B. Nomination Form and Description of 

Fields 

1. Access to Nomination Form 

2. Physical Location of Shortage Area or 

Position 

3. Type I Shortage 

4. Type II Shortage 

5. Type III Shortage 

6. Written Response Sections 

C. NIFA Review of Shortage Situation 

Nominations 

1. Review Panel Composition and Process 

2. Review Criteria 

Guidelines for Veterinary Shortage 

Situation Nominations 

I. Preface and Authority 

In January 2003, the National 

Veterinary Medical Service Act 

(NVMSA) was passed into law adding 

section 1415A to the National 

Agricultural Research, Extension, and 

Teaching Policy Act of 1997 

(NARETPA). This law established a new 

Veterinary Medicine Loan Repayment 

Program (7 U.S.C. 3151a) authorizing 

the Secretary of Agriculture to carry out 

a program of entering into agreements 

with veterinarians under which they 

agree to provide veterinary services in 

veterinarian shortage situations. In 

November 2005, the Agriculture, Rural 

Development, Food and Drug 

Administration, and Related Agencies 

Appropriations Act, 2006 (Pub. L. 109– 

97) appropriated $495,000 for CSREES 

to implement the Veterinary Medicine 

Loan Repayment Program and 

represented the first time funds had 

been appropriated for this program. In 

February 2007, the Revised Continuing 

Appropriations Resolution, 2007 (Pub. 

L. 110–5) appropriated an additional 

$495,000 to CSREES for support of the 

program, and in December 2007, the 

Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008 

appropriated an additional $868,875 to 

CSREES for support of this program. On 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 14 / Friday, January 22, 2010 / Notices 3699 

March 11, 2009, the Omnibus 

Appropriations Act, 2009 (Pub. L. 111– 

8) was enacted, providing an additional 

$2,950,000, for the VMLRP. In October 

2009, the President signed into law, 

Public Law 111–80, Agriculture, Rural 

Development, Food and Drug 

Administration, and Related Agencies 

Appropriations Act of 2010, which 

appropriated $4,800,000 for the VMLRP. 

Consequently, as of the publication of 

this Notice, there is a cumulative total 

of approximately $9.6 million available 

for NIFA to administer this program. 

Funding for future years will be based 

on annual appropriations and balances 

carried forward from prior years, and 

may vary from year to year. 

Section 7105 of the Food, 

Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008, 

Public Law 110–246, (FCEA) amended 

section 1415A to revise the 

determination of veterinarian shortage 

situations to consider (1) geographical 

areas that the Secretary determines have 

a shortage of veterinarians; and (2) areas 

of veterinary practice that the Secretary 

determines have a shortage of 

veterinarians, such as food animal 

medicine, public health, epidemiology, 

and food safety. This section also added 

that priority should be given to 

agreements with veterinarians for the 

practice of food animal medicine in 

veterinarian shortage situations. 

NARETPA section 1415A requires the 

Secretary, when determining the 

amount of repayment for a year of 

service by a veterinarian to consider the 

ability of USDA to maximize the 

number of agreements from the amounts 

appropriated and to provide an 

incentive to serve in veterinary service 

shortage areas with the greatest need. 

This section also provides that loan 

repayments may consist of payments of 

the principal and interest on 

government and commercial loans 

received by the individual for 

attendance of the individual at an 

accredited college of veterinary 

medicine resulting in a degree of Doctor 

of Veterinary Medicine or the 

equivalent. This program is not 

authorized to provide repayments for 

any government or commercial loans 

incurred during the pursuit of another 

degree, such as an associate or bachelor 

degree. 

The Secretary delegated the authority 

to carry out this program to NIFA. 

Pursuant to the requirements enacted 

in the NVMSA of 2004 (as revised), and 

the implementing regulation for this 

Act, Part 3431 Subpart A of the VMLRP 

Interim Rule [74 FR 32788–32798], the 

National Institute of Food and 

Agriculture hereby implements 

Guidelines for the solicitation of 

nomination of veterinary shortage 

situations from authorized State Animal 

Health Officials: 

II. Nomination of Veterinary Shortage 

Situations 

A. General 

1. Eligible Shortage Situations 

Section 1415A of the National 

Agricultural Research, Extension, and 

Teaching Policy Act of 1997 

(NARETPA), as amended and revised by 

Section 7105 of the Food, Conservation, 

and Energy Act of 2008, Public Law 

110–246, (FCEA) directs determination 

of veterinarian shortage situations to 

consider (1) geographical areas that the 

Secretary determines have a shortage of 

veterinarians; and (2) areas of veterinary 

practice that the Secretary determines 

have a shortage of veterinarians, such as 

food animal medicine, public health, 

epidemiology, and food safety. This 

section also added that priority should 

be given to agreements with 

veterinarians for the practice of food 

animal medicine in veterinarian 

shortage situations. 

While the NVMSA (as amended) 

specifies priority be given to food 

animal medicine shortage situations, 

and that consideration also be given to 

specialty areas such as public health, 

epidemiology and food safety, the Act 

does not identify any areas of veterinary 

practice as ineligible. Accordingly, all 

nominated veterinary shortage 

situations will be considered eligible for 

submission. However, the 

competitiveness of submitted 

nominations, upon evaluation by the 

review panel, will reflect the intent of 

Congress that priority be given to certain 

types of veterinary service shortage 

situations. NIFA therefore anticipates 

that in the first year, and perhaps 

subsequent early years of program 

implementation, the most competitive 

nominations will be those directly 

addressing food supply veterinary 

medicine shortage situations. 

NIFA has adopted definitions of the 

practice of veterinary medicine and the 

practice of food supply medicine that 

are broadly inclusive of the critical roles 

veterinarians serve in both public 

practice and private practice situations. 

Nominations describing either public or 

private practice veterinary shortage 

situations will therefore be eligible for 

submission. However, NIFA interprets 

that Congressional intent is to give 

priority to the private practice of food 

animal medicine. NIFA is grateful to the 

Association of American Veterinary 

Medical Colleges (AAVMC), the 

American Veterinary Medical 

Association (AVMA), and other 

stakeholders for their recommendations 

regarding the appropriate balance of 

program emphasis on public and private 

practice shortage situations. NIFA will 

seek to achieve a final distribution of 

approximately 90 percent of 

nominations (and eventual agreements) 

that are geographic, private practice, 

food animal veterinary medicine 

shortage situations, and approximately 

10 percent of nominations that reflect 

public practice shortage situations. 

2. State Respondents and Use of 

Consultation 

Respondents on behalf of each State 

include the chief State Animal Health 

Official (SAHO), as duly authorized by 

the Governor or his designee in each 

State. The SAHO Nominators are 

requested to submit to 

vmlrp@nifa.usda.gov a Form—NIFA 

2009–0001, VMLRP Veterinarian 

Shortage Situation Nomination, which 

is available in the Shortage Situations 

section for the VMLRP on the NIFA Web 

site at http://www.nifa.usda.gov/vmlrp. 

One form must be submitted for each 

nominated shortage situation. NIFA 

strongly encourages the SAHO to 

involve leading health animal experts in 

the State in the identification and 

prioritization of shortage situation 

nominations. 

3. Rationale for Capping Nominations 

and State Allocation Method 

In its consideration of fair, transparent 

and objective approaches to solicitation 

of shortage area nominations, NIFA 

evaluated three alternative strategies 

before deciding on the appropriate 

strategy. The first option considered was 

to impose no limits on the number of 

nominations submitted. The second was 

to allow each State the same number of 

nominations. The third (eventually 

selected) was to differentially cap the 

number of nominations per State based 

on defensible and intuitive criteria. 

The first option, providing no limits 

to the number of nominations per State, 

is fair to the extent that each State and 

insular area has equal opportunity to 

nominate as many situations as desired. 

However, funding for the VMLRP is 

limited (relative to anticipated demand) 

and so allowing potentially high and 

disproportionate submission rates of 

nominations could both unnecessarily 

burden the nominators and the 

reviewers with a potential avalanche of 

nominations and dilute highest need 

situations with lower-level need 

situations. Moreover, NIFA believes that 

the distribution of opportunity under 

this program (i.e., distribution of 

mapped shortage situations resulting 

from the nomination solicitation and 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
3700 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 14 / Friday, January 22, 2010 / Notices 

review process) should roughly reflect 

the national distribution of veterinary 

service demand. By not capping 

nominations based on some objective 

criteria, it is likely there would be no 

correlation between the mapped pattern 

and density of certified shortage 

situations and the actual pattern and 

density of need. This in turn could 

undermine confidence in the program 

with Congress, the public, and other 

stakeholders. 

The second option, limiting all States 

and insular areas to the same number of 

nominations suffers from some of the 

same disadvantages as option one. It has 

the benefit in that it controls the 

administrative burden on both the 

SAHO and the nomination review 

process. However, like option one, there 

would be no correlation between the 

mapped pattern of certified shortage 

situations and the actual pattern of 

need. For example, Guam and Rhode 

Island would be allowed to submit the 

same number of nominations as Texas 

and Nebraska, despite the large 

difference in the sizes of their respective 

animal agriculture industries and rural 

land areas requiring veterinary services. 

The third option, to cap the number 

of nominations in relation to major 

parameters correlating with veterinary 

service demand, achieves the goals both 

of practical control over the 

administrative burden to the States and 

NIFA, and of achieving a mapped 

pattern of certified nominations that 

approximates the theoretical actual 

shortage distribution. In addition, this 

method limits dilution of highest need 

areas with lower-level need areas. The 

disadvantage of this strategy is that 

there is no validated, unbiased, direct 

measure of veterinary shortage and so it 

is necessary to employ robust surrogate 

parameters that correlate with the 

hypothetical cumulative relative need 

for each State in comparison to other 

States. Such parameters exist and the 

degree to which they are not perfect 

measures of veterinary need is 

compensated for by generously 

assigning nomination allowances based 

on State rank for each parameter. 

In the absence of a validated unbiased 

direct measure of relative veterinary 

service need or risk for each State and 

insular area, the National Agricultural 

Statistics Service (NASS) provided 

NIFA with reliable, publically 

accessible, high quality, unbiased data 

that correlate with demand for food 

supply veterinary service. NIFA has 

consulted with NASS and determined 

that NASS State-level variables most 

strongly correlated with food supply 

veterinary service need are ‘‘Livestock 

and Livestock Products Total Sales ($)’’ 

and ‘‘Land Area’’ (acres). The ‘‘Livestock 

and Livestock Products Total Sales ($)’’ 

variable broadly predicts veterinary 

service need in a State because this is 

a normalized (to cash value) estimate of 

the extent of (live) animal agriculture in 

the State. The State ‘‘land area’’ variable 

predicts veterinary service need because 

there is positive correlation between 

State land area, percent of State area 

classified as rural and the percent of 

land devoted to actual or potential 

livestock production. Importantly, land 

area is also directly correlated with the 

number of veterinarians needed to 

provide veterinary services in a State 

because of the practical limitations 

relating to the maximum radius of a 

standard veterinary service area; due to 

fuel and other cost factors, the 

maximum radius a veterinarian 

operating a mobile veterinary service 

can cover is approximately 60 miles, 

which roughly corresponds to two or 

three contiguous counties of average 

size. 

NIFA recognizes that that these two 

NASS variables are not perfect 

predictors of veterinary service demand. 

However, for the purpose of fairly and 

transparently estimating veterinary 

service demand, NIFA believes these 

two unbiased composite variables 

account for a significant proportion of 

several of the most relevant factors 

influencing veterinary service need and 

risk. To further ensure fairness and 

equitability, NIFA is employing these 

variables in a straightforward, 

transparent and liberal manner that 

ensures every State and insular area is 

eligible for at least one nomination and 

that all States receive a generous 

apportionment of nominations, relative 

to their geographic size and size of 

agricultural animal industries. 

Following this rationale, the Secretary 

is specifying the maximum number of 

nominations per State in order to (1) 

assure distribution of designated 

shortage areas in a manner generally 

reflective of the differential overall 

demand for food supply veterinary 

services in different States, (2) ensure a 

practical balance between the number of 

potential awardees and the available 

shortage situations, (3) assure the 

number of shortage situation 

nominations submitted fosters emphasis 

on selection by nominators and 

applicants of the highest priority need 

areas, and (4) provide practical and 

proportional limitations of the 

administrative burden borne by SAHOs 

preparing nominations, and by panelists 

serving on the NIFA nominations 

review panel. 

Furthermore, instituting a limit on the 

number of nominations is consistent 

with language in the Interim Rule 

stating, ‘‘The solicitation may specify 

the maximum number of nominations 

that may be submitted by each State 

animal health official.’’ 

4. State Allocation of Nominations 

For any given program year, the 

number of designated shortage 

situations per State will be limited by 

NIFA, and this will in turn impact the 

number of new nominations a State may 

submit each time NIFA solicits shortage 

nominations. In the first year of the 

program NIFA will accept a number of 

nominations equivalent to the allowable 

number of designated shortage areas. In 

subsequent years, when NIFA may 

solicit additional nominations, the 

number of nominations requested from 

each State will be the maximum number 

of designated shortage situations for the 

State minus the number of shortage 

situations filled since the last 

solicitation for nominations. Thus, with 

each new solicitation, States have the 

opportunity to re-establish the 

maximum number of designated 

shortage situations. NIFA reserves the 

right in the future to proportionally 

adjust the maximum number of 

designated shortage situations per State 

to ensure a balance between available 

funds and the requirement to ensure 

priority is given to mitigating veterinary 

shortages corresponding to situations of 

greatest need. These Nomination 

Allocation tables are available under the 

Shortage Situations section at http:// 

www.nifa.usda.gov/vmlrp. 

Table I represents ‘‘Special 

Consideration Areas’’ which include any 

State or Insular Area not reporting data, 

and/or reporting less than $1,000,000 in 

annual Livestock and Livestock 

Products Total Sales ($), and/or 

possessing less than 500,000 Acres. One 

nomination is allocated to any State or 

Insular Area classified as a Special 

Consideration Area. 

Table II shows how NIFA determined 

nomination allocation based on quartile 

ranks of States for two variables 

correlated with demand for food supply 

veterinary services; ‘‘Livestock and 

Livestock Products Total Sales ($)’’ 

(LPTS) and ‘‘Land Area (acres)’’ (LA). 

The total number of NIFA-approved/ 

designated shortage situations per State 

is based on the quartile ranking of each 

State in terms of LPTS and LA. States 

for which NASS has both LPTS and LA 

values, and which have at least 

$1,000,000 LPTS and at least 500,000 

acres LA (typically all States plus Puerto 

Rico), were independently ranked from 

least to greatest value for each of these 

two composite variables. The two 

ranked lists were then divided into 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 14 / Friday, January 22, 2010 / Notices 3701 

quartiles with quartile 1 containing the 

lowest variable values and quartile 4 

containing the highest variable values. 

Each State then received the number of 

designated shortage situations 

corresponding to the number of the 

quartile in which the State falls. Thus a 

State that falls in the second quartile for 

LA and the third quartile for LPTS will 

be invited to submit up to five 

designated shortage situations (2 + 3). 

This transparent computation was made 

for each State thereby giving a range of 

2 to 8 designated shortage situations, 

contingent upon each State’s quartile 

ranking for the two variables. Should 

changes in future funding for the 

program indicate the need for an 

increase or decrease in the maximum 

number of designated shortage 

situations, a multiplier either greater or 

less than one will be applied to make a 

proportional adjustment to every State. 

The total number of nominations a 

State Animal Health Official may 

submit on behalf of his/her State for the 

current solicitation is shown in Table 

III. 

While Federal Lands are widely 

dispersed within States and Insular 

Areas across the country, they constitute 

a composite total land area over twice 

the size of Alaska. If the 200-mile limit 

U.S. coastal waters and associated 

fishery areas are added, Federal Land 

total acreage would exceed 1 billion. 

Both State and Federal Animal Health 

officials have responsibilities for matters 

relating directly or indirectly to 

terrestrial and aquatic food animal 

health on Federal Lands. An example of 

a food animal health problem requiring 

coordination between State and Federal 

animal health officials is the 

reemergence of bovine TB infection, 

thought to be caused in part by 

circulation of this pathogen in a variety 

of undomesticated animal reservoirs 

that come in contact with domestic 

cattle. Interaction between wildlife and 

domestic livestock, such as sheep and 

cattle, is particularly common in the 

plains States where significant portions 

of Federal lands are leased for grazing. 

Therefore, both SAHOs and the Chief 

Federal Animal Health Officer (Deputy 

Administrator, Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service or designee) may 

submit nominations to address shortage 

situations on or related to Federal 

Lands. These nominations count toward 

the maximum number of nominations 

allocated to each entity. 

NIFA emphasizes that shortage 

nomination allocation is merely 

intended to broadly balance number of 

certified shortage situations across 

States prior to the applications and 

awards phase of the VMLRP. In the 

awards phase, no State will be given a 

preference for placement of awardees. 

Awards will be made based strictly on 

the peer review panel’s assessment of 

the quality of the match between the 

knowledge, skills and abilities of the 

applicant and the attributes of the 

specific shortage situation applied for. 

5. Period Covered 

Each designated shortage situation 

shall be certified until filled, or 

withdrawn by the SAHO. A SAHO may 

request that NIFA remove a previously 

certified and designated shortage 

situation by sending an e-mail to the 

program manager, Dr. Gary Sherman 

(gsherman@nifa.usda.gov). The request 

should specifically identify the shortage 

situation proposed for decertification, 

and reason(s) for decertification should 

be included. The program manager will 

review the request, make a 

determination, and inform the 

requesting SAHO of the final action 

taken. Where a request for 

decertification leads to removal from the 

list of NIFA-designated shortage 

situations, the decertified situation may 

not be replaced by nomination of an 

alternate shortage situation until the 

next time NIFA releases an RFA 

soliciting shortage nominations for this 

program. 

6. Submission and Due Date 

Shortage situation nominations must 

be submitted by March 8, 2010, to the 

Office of Extramural Programs; National 

Institute of Food and Agriculture 

(NIFA); U.S. Department of Agriculture. 

The nominations must be submitted by 

E-mail to vmlrp@nifa.usda.gov. 

7. Definitions 

For the purpose of implementing the 

solicitation for veterinary shortage 

situations, the following definitions are 

applicable: 

Act means the National Veterinary 

Medical Service Act, as amended. 

Agency or NIFA means the National 

Institute of Food and Agriculture. 

Department means the United States 

Department of Agriculture. 

Food animal means the following 

species: bovine, porcine, ovine/camelid, 

cervid, poultry, caprine, and any other 

species as determined by the Secretary. 

Food supply veterinary medicine 

means all aspects of veterinary 

medicine’s involvement in food supply 

systems, from traditional agricultural 

production to consumption. 

Insular area means the 

Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, 

American Samoa, the Commonwealth of 

the Northern Mariana Islands, the 

Federated States of Micronesia, the 

Republic of the Marshall Islands, the 

Republic of Palau, and the Virgin 

Islands of the United States. 

NVMSA means the National 

Veterinary Medicine Service Act. 

Practice of food supply veterinary 

medicine includes corporate/private 

practices devoted to food animal 

medicine, mixed animal medicine 

located in a rural area (at least 30 

percent of practice devoted to food 

animal medicine), food safety, 

epidemiology, public health, animal 

health, and other practices that 

contribute to the production of a safe 

and wholesome food supply. 

Practice of veterinary medicine 

means: To diagnose, treat, correct, 

change, alleviate, or prevent animal 

disease, illness, pain, deformity, defect, 

injury, or other physical, dental, or 

mental conditions by any method or 

mode; including: the prescription, 

dispensing, administration, or 

application of any drug, medicine, 

biologic, apparatus, anesthetic, or other 

therapeutic or diagnostic substance or 

medical or surgical technique, or the use 

of complementary, alternative, and 

integrative therapies, or the use of any 

manual or mechanical procedure for 

reproductive management, or the 

rendering of advice or recommendation 

by any means including telephonic and 

other electronic communications with 

regard to any of the above. 

Rural area means any area other than 

a city or town that has a population of 

50,000 inhabitants and the urbanized 

area contiguous and adjacent to such a 

city or town. 

Secretary means the Secretary of 

Agriculture and any other officer or 

employee of the Department to whom 

the authority involved has been 

delegated. 

Service area means geographic area in 

which the veterinarian will be providing 

veterinary medical services. 

State means any one of the fifty 

States, the District of Columbia, and the 

insular areas of the United States. Also 

included are total ‘‘Federal Lands’’, 

defined for convenience as a single 

entity. 

State animal health official or SAHO 

means the State veterinarian, or 

equivalent, who will be responsible for 

nominating and certifying veterinarian 

shortage situations within State, insular 

Area, DC or Federal Lands entities. 

Veterinarian means a person who has 

received a professional veterinary 

medicine degree from a college of 

veterinary medicine accredited by the 

AVMA Council on Education. 

Veterinary medicine means all 

branches and specialties included 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
3702 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 14 / Friday, January 22, 2010 / Notices 

within the practice of veterinary 

medicine. 

Veterinary Medicine Loan Repayment 

Program or VMLRP means the 

Veterinary Medicine Loan Repayment 

Program authorized by the National 

Veterinary Medical Service Act. 

Veterinarian shortage situation means 

any of the following situations in which 

the Secretary, in accordance with the 

process in Subpart A of 7 CFR part 

3431, determines has a shortage of 

veterinarians: 

(1) Geographical areas that the 

Secretary determines have a shortage of 

food supply veterinarians; and 

(2) Areas of veterinary practice that 

the Secretary determines have a 

shortage of food supply veterinarians, 

such as food animal medicine, public 

health, animal health, epidemiology, 

and food safety. 

B. Nomination Form and Description of 

Fields 

1. Access to Nomination Form 

The veterinary shortage situation 

nomination form is available in the 

Shortage Situations section at http:// 

www.nifa.usda.gov/vmlrp and should be 

e-mailed to vmlrp@nifa.usda.gov. 

2. Physical Location of Shortage Area or 

Position 

Following conclusion of the 

nomination submission and designation 

process, NIFA must prepare lists and/or 

map(s) that include all certified shortage 

situations. This will require 

specification of a physical location 

representing the center of the service 

area (for a geographic shortage), or the 

location of the main office or work 

address for a public practice and/or 

specialty practice shortage. For 

example, if the State seeks to certify a 

tri-county area as a food animal 

veterinary service (e.g., Type I) shortage 

situation, a road intersection 

approximating the center of the tricounty area would constitute a 

satisfactory physical location for NIFA’s 

listing and mapping purposes. By 

contrast, if the State is identifying 

‘‘veterinary diagnostician’’, a Type III 

nomination, as a shortage situation, then 

the nominator would complete this field 

by filling in the address of the location 

where the diagnostician would work 

(e.g., State animal disease diagnostic 

laboratory). 

3. Type I Shortage—80 Percent or 

Greater Private Practice Food Supply 

Veterinary Medicine 

Check one or more boxes indicating 

which specie(s) constitute the veterinary 

shortage situation. The Type I shortage 

situation must entail at least an 80 

percent time commitment to private 

practice food supply veterinary 

medicine. The nominator will specify 

the minimum percent time (between 80 

and 100 percent) a veterinarian must 

commit in order to satisfactorily fill the 

specific nominated situation. The 

shortage situation may be located 

anywhere (rural or non-rural) so long as 

the veterinary service shortages to be 

mitigated are consistent with the 

definition of ‘‘practice of food supply 

veterinary medicine.’’ The minimum 80 

percent time commitment is, in part, 

recognition of the fact that occasionally 

food animal veterinary practitioners are 

expected to meet the needs of other 

veterinary service sectors such as 

clientele owning companion and exotic 

animals. Type I nominations are 

intended to address those shortage 

situations where the nominator believes 

a veterinarian can operate profitably 

committing between 80 and 100 percent 

time to food animal medicine activities 

in the designated shortage area, given 

the client base and other socioeconomic factors impacting viability of 

veterinary practices in the area. This 

generally corresponds to a shortage area 

where clients can reasonably be 

expected to pay for professional 

veterinary services and where food 

animal populations are sufficiently 

dense to support a (or another) 

veterinarian. The personal residence of 

the veterinarian (VMLRP awardee) and 

the address of veterinary practice 

employing the veterinarian may or may 

not fall within the geographic bounds of 

the designated shortage area. 

4. Type II Shortage—30 Percent or 

Greater Private Practice Food Supply 

Veterinary Medicine in a Rural Area (as 

Defined) 

Check one or more boxes indicating 

which specie(s) constitute the veterinary 

shortage situation. The shortage 

situation must be in an area satisfying 

the definition of ‘‘rural.’’ The minimum 

30 percent-time (12 hr/wk) commitment 

of an awardee to serve in a rural 

shortage situation is in recognition of 

the fact that there may be some remote 

or economically depressed rural areas in 

need of food animal veterinary services 

that are unable to support a practitioner 

predominately serving the food animal 

sector, yet the need for food animal 

veterinary services for an existing, 

relatively small, proportion of available 

food animal business is nevertheless 

great. The Type II nomination is 

therefore intended to address those rural 

shortage situations where the nominator 

believes there is a critical shortage of 

food supply veterinary services, and 

that a veterinarian can operate 

profitably committing 30 to 100 percent 

to food animal medicine in the 

designated rural shortage area. The 

nominator will specify the minimum 

percent time (between 30 and 100 

percent) a veterinarian must commit in 

order to satisfactorily fill the specific 

nominated situation. Under the Type II 

nomination category, the expectation is 

that the veterinarian may provide 

veterinary services to other veterinary 

sectors (e.g., companion animal 

clientele) as a means of achieving 

financial viability. As with Type I 

nominations, the residence of the 

veterinarian (VMLRP awardee) and/or 

the address of veterinary practice 

employing the veterinarian may or may 

not fall within the geographic bounds of 

the designated shortage area. However, 

the awardee is required to verify the 

specified minimum percent time 

commitment (30 percent to 100 percent) 

to service within the specified 

geographic shortage area. 

5. Type III Shortage—Public Practice 

Shortage (49%—Time or Greater Public 

Practice) 

In the spaces provided, identify the 

‘‘Employer’’ and the ‘‘Position Title’’, and 

check one or more of the appropriate 

boxes identifying the specialty/ 

disciplinary area(s) being nominated as 

a shortage situation. This is a broad 

nomination category comprising many 

types of specialized veterinary training 

and employment areas relating to food 

supply veterinary workforce capacity 

and capability. These positions are 

typically located in city, county, State 

and Federal Government, and 

institutions of higher education. 

Examples of positions within the public 

practice sector include university 

faculty and staff, veterinary laboratory 

diagnostician, County Public Health 

Officer, State Veterinarian, State Public 

Health Veterinarian, State 

Epidemiologist, FSIS meat inspector, 

Animal and Plant Health Inspection 

Service (APHIS) Area Veterinarian in 

Charge (AVIC), and Federal Veterinary 

Medical Officer (VMO). 

Veterinary shortage situations such as 

those listed above are eligible for 

consideration under Type III 

nomination. However, nominators 

should be aware that Congress has 

stipulated that the VMLRP must 

emphasize private food animal practice 

shortage situations. Accordingly, NIFA 

anticipates that loan repayments for the 

Public Practice sector will be limited to 

approximately 10 percent of total 

nominations and available funds. 

The minimum time commitment 

serving under a Type III shortage 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 14 / Friday, January 22, 2010 / Notices 3703 

nomination is 49 percent. The 

nominator will specify the minimum 

percent time (between 49 percent and 

100 percent) a veterinarian must commit 

in order to satisfactorily fill the specific 

nominated situation. NIFA understands 

that some public practice employment 

opportunities that are shortage 

situations may be part-time positions. 

For example, a veterinarian pursuing an 

advanced degree (in a shortage 

discipline area) on a part-time basis may 

also be employed by the university for 

the balance of the veterinarian’s time to 

provide part-time professional 

veterinary service(s) such as teaching, 

clinical service, or laboratory animal 

care; areas that may or may not also 

qualify as veterinary shortage situations. 

The 49 percent minimum therefore 

provides flexibility to nominators 

wishing to certify public practice 

shortage situations that would be 

ineligible under more stringent 

minimum percent time requirements. 

6. Written Response Sections 

a. Objectives of a veterinarian meeting 

this shortage situation. 

Within the allowed word limit the 

nominator should clearly State 

overarching objectives the State hopes 

to achieve by placing a veterinarian in 

the nominated situation. Include the 

minimum percent time commitment 

(within the range of the shortage Type 

selected) the awardee is expected to 

devote to filling the specific food supply 

veterinary shortage situation. 

b. Activities of a veterinarian meeting 

this shortage situation. 

Within the allowed word limit the 

nominator should clearly State the 

principal day-to-day professional 

activities that would have to be 

conducted in order to achieve the 

objectives described in (a) above. 

c. Past efforts to recruit and retain a 

veterinarian in the shortage situation. 

Within the allowed word limit the 

nominator should explain any prior 

efforts to mitigate this veterinary service 

shortage, and prospects for recruiting 

veterinarian(s) in the future. 

d. Risk of this veterinarian position 

not being secured or retained. 

Within the allowed word limit the 

nominator should explain the 

consequences of not addressing this 

veterinary shortage situation. 

e. Candidacy for a ‘‘service in 

emergency’’ agreement. NIFA is not 

requesting information in support of 

this type of agreements at this time. 

C. NIFA Review of Shortage Situation 

Nominations 

1. Review Panel Composition and 

Process 

NIFA will convene a panel of food 

supply veterinary medicine experts 

from Federal and State agencies, as well 

as institutions receiving Animal Health 

and Disease Research Program funds 

under section 1433 of NARETPA, who 

will review the nominations and make 

recommendations to the NIFA Program 

Manager. NIFA explored the possibly of 

including experts from professional 

organizations for this process, but under 

the National Agricultural Research, 

Extension, and Teaching Policy Act 

(NARETPA) section 1409A(e), panelists 

for the purposes of this process are 

limited to Federal and State agencies 

and cooperating State institutions (i.e., 

NARETPA section 1433 recipients). 

The VMLRP Program Manager will 

then review the recommendations and 

designate the VMLRP shortage 

situations. The list of shortage situations 

will be published in the Federal 

Register and will be made available on 

the NIFA Web site at http:// 

www.nifa.usda.gov/vmlrp. 

2. Review Criteria 

Criteria used by the shortage situation 

nomination review panel and NIFA for 

certifying a veterinary shortage situation 

will be consistent with the information 

requested in the shortage situations 

nomination form. NIFA understands 

that defining the risk landscape 

associated with shortages of veterinary 

services throughout a State is a process 

that may require consideration of many 

qualitative and quantitative factors. In 

addition, each shortage situation will be 

characterized by a different array of 

subjective and objective supportive 

information that must be developed into 

a cogent case identifying, characterizing, 

and justifying a given geographic or 

disciplinary area as one deficient in 

certain types of veterinary capacity or 

service. To accommodate the 

uniqueness of each shortage situation, 

the nomination form provides 

opportunities to present a case using 

both supportive metrics and narrative 

explanations to define and explain the 

proposed need. At the same time, the 

elements of the nomination form 

provide a common structure for the 

information collection process which 

will in turn facilitate fair comparison of 

the relative merits of each nomination 

by the evaluation panel. 

While NIFA anticipates some 

arguments made in support of a given 

shortage situation will be qualitative, 

respondents are encouraged to present 

verifiable quantitative and qualitative 

evidentiary information where ever 

possible. 

Maximum point values review 

panelists may award for response to 

each of the nomination for form 

elements are as follows: 

20 points: Describe the objectives of a 

veterinarian meeting this shortage 

situation as well as being located in the 

community, area, State/insular area, or 

position requested above. 

20 points: Describe the activities of a 

veterinarian meeting this shortage 

situation and being located in the 

community, area, State/insular area, or 

position requested above. 

15 points: Describe any past efforts to 

recruit and retain a veterinarian in the 

shortage situation identified above. 

25 points: Describe the risk of this 

veterinarian position not being secured 

or retained. Include the risk(s) to the 

production of a safe and wholesome 

food supply and/or to animal, human, 

and environmental health not only in 

the community but in the region, State/ 

insular area, nation, and/or 

international community. 

An additional 20 points will be used 

by review panelists to evaluate overall 

merit/quality of the case made for 

inclusion of each nomination in the list 

of certified veterinary shortage 

situations. 

Prior to the panel being convened, 

shortage situation nominations will be 

evaluated and scored according to the 

established scoring system by a primary 

reviewer. When the panel convenes, the 

primary reviewer will present each 

nomination orally in summary form. 

After each presentation, panelists will 

have an opportunity, if necessary, to 

discuss the nomination, with the 

primary reviewer leading the discussion 

and recording comments. After the 

panel discussion is complete, any 

scoring revisions will be made by and 

at the discretion of the primary 

reviewer. The panel is then polled to 

recommend, or not recommend, the 

shortage situation designation. 

Nominations scoring 70 or higher by the 

primary reviewer (on a scale of 0 to 

100), and receiving a simple majority 

vote in support of designation as a 

shortage situation will be 

‘‘recommended for designation as a 

shortage situation.’’ Nominations scoring 

below 70 by the primary reviewer, and 

failure to achieve a simple majority vote 

in support of designation will be ‘‘not 

recommended for designation as a 

shortage situation.’’ In the event of a 

discrepancy between the primary 

reviewer’s scoring and the panel poll 

results, the VMLRP program manager 

will be authorized to make the final 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
3704 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 14 / Friday, January 22, 2010 / Notices 

determination on the nomination’s 

designation. 

Done at Washington, DC, January 15, 2010. 

Roger Beachy, 

Director, National Institute of Food and 

Agriculture. 

[FR Doc. 2010–1114 Filed 1–21–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Patent and Trademark Office 

Secrecy and License To Export 

ACTION: Proposed collection; comment 

request. 

SUMMARY: The United States Patent and 

Trademark Office (USPTO), as part of its 

continuing effort to reduce paperwork 

and respondent burden, invites the 

general public and other Federal 

agencies to take this opportunity to 

comment on the revision of a continuing 

information collection, as required by 

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 

Public Law 104–13 (44 U.S.C. 

3506(c)(2)(A)). 

DATES: Written comments must be 

submitted on or before March 23, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by any of the following methods: 

• E-mail: Susan.Fawcett@uspto.gov. 

Include ‘‘0651–0034 Secrecy and 

License to Export collection comment’’ 

in the subject line of the message. 

• Fax: 571–273–0112, marked to the 

attention of Susan K. Fawcett. 

• Mail: Susan K. Fawcett, Records 

Officer, Office of the Chief Information 

Officer, U.S. Patent and Trademark 

Office, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 

22313–1450. 

• Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http: 

//www.regulations.gov 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Requests for additional information 

should be directed to the attention of 

Brian Hanlon, Director, Office of Patent 

Legal Administration, U.S. Patent and 

Trademark Office, P.O. Box 1450, 

Alexandria, VA 22313–1450; by 

telephone 571–272–5047; or by e-mail 

to Brian.Hanlon@uspto.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Abstract 

In the interest of national security, 

patent laws and rules place certain 

limitations on the disclosure of 

information contained in patents and 

patent applications and on the filing of 

applications for patents in foreign 

countries. Whenever publication or 

disclosure by the publication of an 

application, in the opinion of the head 

of the interested Government agency, is 

determined to be detrimental to national 

security, the Commissioner for Patents 

at the United States Patent and 

Trademark Office (USPTO) must issue a 

secrecy order and withhold the grant of 

a patent for such period as the national 

interest requires. If a secrecy order is 

applied to an international application, 

the application will not be forwarded to 

the International Bureau as long as the 

secrecy order is in effect. The USPTO 

collects information to determine 

whether the patent laws and rules have 

been complied with and to grant or 

revoke licenses to file abroad when 

appropriate. This collection of 

information is required by 35 

U.S.C.181–188 and administered 

through 37 CFR 5.1–5.33. 

There are no forms associated with 

this collection of information. 

II. Method of Collection 

By mail, facsimile, or hand delivery to 

the USPTO when the applicant or agent 

files a patent application with the 

USPTO, submits subsequent papers 

during the prosecution of the 

application to the USPTO, or submits a 

request for a foreign filing license for a 

patent application to be filed abroad 

before the filing of a U.S. patent 

application. 

III. Data 

OMB Number: 0651–0034. 

Form Number(s): None. 

Type of Review: Extension of a 

currently approved collection. 

Affected Public: Individuals, 

businesses or other for-profits; not-forprofit institutions. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

1,794 responses per year. 

Estimated Time Per Response: The 

USPTO estimates that it will take 

between 30 minutes (0.5 hours) to 4 

hours to gather, prepare and submit this 

information, depending upon the 

complexity of the situation. 

Estimated Total Annual Respondent 

Burden Hours: 1,538 hours per year. 

Estimated Total Annual Respondent 

Cost Burden: $499,850. The USPTO 

expects that the information in this 

collection will be prepared by attorneys. 

Using the professional hourly rate of 

$325 for attorneys in private firms, the 

USPTO estimates that this collection 

will have a total respondent cost burden 

of $499,850 per year. 

Item 

Estimated 

time for 

response 

Estimated 

annual 

responses 

Estimated 

annual 

burden hours 

Petition for rescission of secrecy order ................................................................... 3 hours ...................... 6 18 

Petition to disclose or modification of secrecy order .............................................. 2 hours ...................... 3 6 

Petition for general and group permits .................................................................... 1 hour ........................ 1 1 

Petition for expedited handling of license (no corresponding application) ............. 30 minutes ................. 1,347 674 

Petition for expedited handling of license (corresponding U.S. application) .......... 30 minutes ................. 259 130 

Petition for changing the scope of a license ........................................................... 30 minutes ................. 1 1 

Petition for retroactive license ................................................................................. 4 hours ...................... 177 708 

Totals ................................................................................................................ .................................... 1,794 1,538 

Estimated Total Annual Non-Hour 

Respondent Cost Burden: $356,879. 

There are no capital start-up, 

maintenance, or record keeping costs 

associated with this information 

collection. There are, however, filing 

fees and postage costs. 

This collection has a total of $356,800 

in associated filing fees, as shown in the 

accompanying table. 

Item Responses Filing fee Total filing fees 

Petition for rescission of secrecy order ........................................................................... 6 $0.00 $0.00 

Petition to disclose or modification of secrecy order ...................................................... 3 0.00 0.00 

Petition for general and group permits ............................................................................ 1 0.00 0.00 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES