Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 22 / Friday, February 1, 2008 / Notices 6113 

The proposed revisions would provide 

applicants for service with an optional 

grade designation for pea and lentil 

certification and remove the 

requirement that for Mixed Dry Peas, 

the percentage of each class in the 

mixture be shown on the grade line. The 

notice provided an opportunity for 

interested parties to forward written 

comments to the Grain Inspection, 

Packers and Stockyards Administration 

(GIPSA) until May 17, 2007. Due to the 

continued high level of interest in this 

notice, we are reopening the comment 

period to provide interested parties with 

additional time in which to comment. 

DATES: We will consider comments that 

we receive by April 1, 2008. 

ADDRESSES: We invite you to submit 

your comments on the notice. You may 

submit comments by any of the 

following methods: 

• E-mail: Send comments via 

electronic mail to 

comments.gipsa@usda.gov. 

• Mail: Send hardcopy written 

comments to Tess Butler, GIPSA, USDA, 

1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Room 

1633–S, Washington, DC 20250–3604. 

• Fax: Send comments by facsimile 

transmission to: (202) 690–2173. 

• Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver 

comments to: Tess Butler, GIPSA, 

USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue, 

SW., Room 1643–S, Washington, DC 

20250–3604 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulation.gov. Follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Instructions: All comments should 

make reference to the date and page 

number of this issue of the Federal 

Register. 

• Read Comments: All comments will 

be available for public inspection in the 

above office during regular business 

hours (7 CFR 1.27 (b)). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Beverly A. Whalen at USDA, GIPSA, 

FGIS, Market and Program Analysis 

Staff, Suite 180, STOP 1404, 6501 

Beacon Drive, Kansas City, Missouri, 

64133; Telephone (816) 823–4648; Fax 

Number (816) 823–4644; e-mail 

Beverly.A.Whalen@usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: GIPSA 

published a notice in the Federal 

Register on April 17, 2007 (72 FR 

19169), inviting comments from all 

interested persons on the proposed 

revisions to the U.S. Standards for 

Whole Dry Peas, Split Peas, and Lentils. 

The proposed revisions would provide 

applicants for service with an optional 

grade designation for pea and lentil 

certification and remove the 

requirement for Mixed Dry Peas, the 

percentage of each class in the mixture 

be shown on the grade line. For ease of 

reference, we have included in this 

notice the discussion of the revisions to 

the U.S. Standards for Whole Dry Peas, 

Split Peas, and Lentils that are under 

consideration. 

Optional Grade Designation and 

Certification Procedures 

Currently, inspectors certify peas and 

lentils offered for inspection as a 

specific quality (U.S. grade), such as 

U.S. No. 2 Smooth Green Dry Peas. 

Certifying a specific grade is commonly 

referred to as ‘‘Option 1’’ grade 

designation. This works well most of the 

time, however, there are exceptions. At 

times, sellers find when preparing to 

load peas or lentils for shipment that the 

supply of a particular grade of pea or 

lentil may be insufficient to meet the 

quality and quantity requirements 

specified in the sales contract. When 

this happens, the seller may find it 

necessary to ship peas or lentils of a 

better quality. However, current 

inspection procedures do not allow the 

flexibility to describe or certify superior 

quality peas or lentils as being of a 

lower quality. If the lot presented for 

inspection is not uniform in quality for 

the declared grade, the inspector 

certifies each portion separately 

according to quality. That is, if a 

consignment consists of both U.S. No. 1 

and 2 Smooth Green Dry Peas, current 

procedure requires that the quantity 

representing each of the different 

qualities receive separate certification. 

Such certification may not meet the 

terms of sale for the contract. 

An alternative approach is termed 

‘‘Option 2’’ grade designation. When a 

contract specifies an Option 2 grade 

designation, the applicant may 

specifically request Option 2 

certification. Under Option 2 

certification, there would be no 

limitation placed on the amount of 

better quality peas and lentils in the lot. 

When a lot meets or is of better quality 

than the declared grade, inspectors 

would include the term ‘‘or better’’

immediately following the numerical or 

sample grade designation. 

We would like to offer the Option 2 

grade designation and certification 

approach for peas and lentils. Under 

such an approach, the applicant for 

inspection can obtain the optional 

certification procedure by requesting it 

on the application for inspection. The 

applicant would file the request for the 

optional certification prior to the 

beginning of inspection so the inspector 

knows how to certify the lot. Peas or 

lentils that are a better quality than that 

specified by the contract would be 

certified as a specific grade ‘‘or better;’’

(for example, U.S. No. 2, or better, 

Smooth Dry Peas). We believe that 

Option 2 grade designation and 

certification will provide sellers with 

the flexibility to ship peas and lentils of 

better quality, and provide buyers with 

the desirable option of receiving better 

quality. 

Mixed Whole Dry Peas 

We also propose to eliminate the 

requirement that certain grade related 

information be shown on the grade line 

of the certificate for the class of Mixed 

Whole Dry Peas. Currently, the U.S. 

standards for Whole Dry Peas require a 

breakdown of the different classes, in 

order of predominance, be shown on the 

grade line of the certificate, in addition 

to the regular grade designation 

information, when the peas are classed 

as Mixed peas. Instead of showing this 

information on the grade line, we 

propose to enter such information in the 

‘‘Results’’ section of the certificate. This 

approach will not change the grade of 

the product and will enhance the 

readability of the certificate. 

Comments 

The comment period of 30 days from 

the date of publication (72 FR 19169) 

closed on May 17, 2007. Due to 

continued high level of interest in the 

April 17, 2007, notice, GIPSA is 

reopening the comment period to 

provide interested parties additional 

time to comment. As a result, the 

comment period is reopened for a 60 

day period. We welcome both 

comments from interested persons who 

did not comment during the initial 30 

day period, as well as those interested 

persons who have already commented. 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1621–1627. 

David R. Shipman, 

Acting Administrator, Grain Inspection, 

Packers and Stockyards Administration. 

[FR Doc. E8–1820 Filed 1–31–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–KD–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Rural Utilities Service 

Information Collection Activity; 

Comment Request 

AGENCY: Rural Utilities Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Notice and request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended), the 

Rural Utilities Service’s (RUS) an 

agency delivering the U.S. Department 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES

6114 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 22 / Friday, February 1, 2008 / Notices 

of Agriculture (USDA) Rural 

Development Utilities Programs, invites 

comments on this information 

collection for which approval from the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) will be requested. 

DATES: Comments on this notice must be 

received by April 1, 2008. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michele L. Brooks, Acting Director, 

Program Development & Regulatory 

Analysis, Rural Utilities Service, USDA, 

1400 Independence Ave., SW., STOP 

1522, Room 5168—South Building, 

Washington, DC 20250–1522. 

Telephone: (202) 690–1078. Fax: (202) 

720–8435. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Office 

of Management and Budget’s (OMB) 

regulation (5 CFR part 1320) implanting 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13) requires 

that interested members of the public 

and affected agencies have an 

opportunity to comment on information 

collection and recordkeeping activities 

(see 5 CFR 1320.8(d)). This notice 

identifies an information collection that 

RUS is submitting to OMB for 

extension. 

Comments are invited on (a) 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; (b) the accuracy of the 

agency’s estimate of burden including 

the validity of the methodology and 

assumption used; (c) ways to enhance 

the quality, utility and clarity of the 

information to be collected; and (d) 

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 on 

other forms of information technology. 

Comments may be sent to: Joyce 

McNeil, Program Development and 

Regulatory Analysis, Rural Utilities 

Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

1400 Independence Ave., SW., Room 

5166-South, STOP 1522, Washington, 

DC 20250–1522. Fax: (202) 720–8435. Email: Joyce.mcneil@wdc.usda.gov. 

Title: 7 CFR 1726, Electric System 

Construction Policies and Procedures. 

OMB Control Number: 0572–0107. 

Type of Request: Extension of a 

previously approved collection. 

Abstract: In order to facilitate the 

programmatic interest of the Rural 

Electrification Act of 1936, 7 U.S.C. 901 

et seq. (RE Act), and, in order to assure 

that loans made or guaranteed by RUS 

are adequately secured, RUS, as a 

secured lender, has established certain 

standards and specifications for 

materials, equipment, and construction 

of electric systems. The use of standard 

forms, construction contracts, and 

procurement procedures helps assure 

RUS that appropriate standards and 

specification are maintained; RUS’ loan 

security is not adversely affected; and 

the loan and loan guarantee funds are 

used effectively and for the intended 

purposes. 

Estimate of Burden: Public reporting 

burden for this collection of information 

is estimated to average 1.5 minutes per 

response. 

Respondents: Businesses or other for 

profits; Not-for-profit institutions. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

697. 

Estimated Number of Responses per 

Respondent: 5. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden on 

Respondents: 71 hours. 

Copies of this information collection, 

and related form and instructions, can 

be obtained from Joyce McNeil, Program 

Development and Regulatory Analysis, 

at (202) 720–0812. 

All responses to this notice will be 

summarized and included in the request 

for OMB approval. All comments will 

also become a matter of public record. 

Dated: January 24, 2008. 

James M. Andrew, 

Administrator, Rural Utilities Service. 

[FR Doc. E8–1892 Filed 1–31–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Submission for OMB Review; 

Comment Request 

The Department of Commerce (DOC) 

will submit to the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) for clearance the 

following proposal for collection of 

information under the provisions of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 

Chapter 35). 

Agency: Bureau of Economic Analysis 

(BEA). 

Title: Expenditures Incurred by 

Recipients of Biomedical Research 

Awards from the National Institutes of 

Health (NIH). 

OMB Control Number: None. 

Form Number: None. 

Type of Review: Regular submission. 

Burden Hours: 1,650. 

Number of Respondents: 150. 

Average Hours Per Response: 11. 

Needs and Uses: The survey to obtain 

the distribution of expenditures 

incurred by recipients of biomedical 

research awards from the National 

Institutes of Health Research (NIH) will 

provide information on how the NIH 

award amounts are expended across 

several major categories. This 

information, along with wage and price 

data from other published sources, will 

be used to generate the Biomedical 

Research and Developmental Price 

Index (BRDPI). The Bureau of Economic 

Analysis (BEA) of the Department of 

Commerce develops this index for the 

National Institutes of Health (NIH) 

under reimbursable contract. The BRDPI 

is an index of prices paid for the labor, 

supplies, equipment, and other inputs 

required to perform the biomedical 

research the NIH supports in its 

intramural laboratories and through its 

awards to extramural organizations. The 

BRDPI is a vital tool for planning the 

NIH research budget and analyzing 

future NIH programs. A survey of award 

recipient entities is currently the only 

means for updating the expenditure 

categories that are used to prepare the 

BRDPI. 

Affected Public: Business or other forprofit organizations, and not-for-profit 

institutions. 

Frequency: Annually. 

Respondent’s Obligations: Voluntary. 

Legal Authority: 45 CFR Subpart C, 

Post-Award Requirements, Sections 

74.21 and 74.53; 42 U.S.C. 282; 

Economy Act (31 U.S.C. 1535 and 1536); 

15 U.S.C. 1525; and 15 U.S.C. 1527a. 

OMB Desk Officer: Paul Bugg, (202) 

395–3093. 

Copies of the above information 

collection proposal can be obtained by 

calling or writing Diana Hynek, 

Departmental Paperwork Clearance 

Officer, (202) 482–0266, Office of the 

Chief Information Officer, Department 

of Commerce, Room 6625, 14th Street 

and Constitution Avenue, NW., 

Washington DC 20230, or via the 

Internet at dHynek@doc.gov. 

Send comments on the proposed 

information collection within 30 days of 

publication of this notice to Paul Bugg, 

OMB Desk Officer, via the Internet at 

pbugg@omb.eop.gov or by fax (202) 

395–7245. 

Dated: January 29, 2008. 

Gwellnar Banks, 

Management Analyst, Office of the Chief 

Information Officer. 

[FR Doc. E8–1831 Filed 1–31–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–06–P 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES