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

26186 

Vol. 74, No. 103 

Monday, June 1, 2009 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Research Service 

Notice of Intent To Seek OMB Approval 

To Collect Information: Forms 

Pertaining to the 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 

must be received by August 5, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Address all comments 

concerning this notice to: Michael S. 

Strauss, Peer Review Program 

Coordinator, Office of Scientific Quality 

Review, Agricultural Research Agency, 

USDA, 5601 Sunnyside Avenue, 

Beltsville, Maryland 20705; Phone: 301– 

504–3283; Fax: 301–504–1251. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael S. Strauss, 301–504–3283. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Office 

of Scientific Quality Review will seek 

approval from OMB to update six 

existing forms that will allow the ARS 

to efficiently manage data associated 

with the peer review of agricultural 

research. All forms are transferred and 

received in an electronic storage format 

that does not include on-line access. 

Abstract: The Office of Scientific 

Quality Review (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 OSQR 

manages the ARS peer review system by 

centrally planning peer panel reviews 

for ARS research projects on a five-year 

cycle. 

Each set of reviews is assigned a 

chairperson to govern the review 

process. The majority of the peer 

reviewers are non-ARS scientists. Peer 

review panels are convened to provide 

in-depth discussion and review of the 

research project plans. Each panel 

reviewer receives information on 

between 1 and 20 ARS research projects. 

On average, 220 research projects are 

reviewed annually by an estimated 100 

reviewers; whereby approximately 200 

are reviewed by panel and 

approximately 20 are reviewed through 

an ad hoc process. The organization and 

management of this peer review system, 

particularly panel reviews, is highly 

dependent on the use of forms. 

The Office of Scientific Quality 

Review 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. 

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. 

2. Panelist Information Form—USDA 

uses this form to gather up-to-date 

background information about the 

reviewer. Reviewers often include 

sensitive information on this form. This 

form requires an original signature. 

Collection of information on the 

Panelist Information Form is needed to 

gather up-to-date background 

information about the reviewer and 

essential information needed for 

reimbursement of travel expenses and/ 

or payment of an honorarium. It 

contains sensitive personally 

identifiable information. 

3. Peer Review of an ARS Research 

Project Forms (Peer Review Forms)— 

USDA uses these forms to guide the 

reviewer’s comments on the subject 

project. The forms contain the reviewing 

criteria and space for the reviewer’s 

narrative comments and evaluation. For 

Ad Hoc Reviewers, who are not 

members of a review panel, a check-off 

listing of the Action Classes is added at 

the end to allow the individual also to 

provide an overall rating of the plan. 

Collection of information on the Peer 

Review Forms is needed to guide the 

reviewer comments on the subject 

project. The forms contain the reviewing 

criteria and space to insert comments, 

and for Ad Hoc reviewers a place to 

register an overall Action Class. 

4. Recommendations for ARS 

Research Project Form 

(Recommendations Form)—USDA uses 

this form to guide the panel’s evaluation 

and critique of the review process. The 

form contains the recommendations of 

the panel for the subject research 

project. Collection of information on the 

Recommendations Form is needed to 

provide the panel’s critique of the 

reviewed research project plan. It 

contains the consensus 

recommendations of the panel for the 

subject research project. 

5. 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. Collection of information 

on the Expense Report Form is needed 

to document the travel expense incurred 

by a panel reviewer in attending a peer 

review meeting. The Expense Report 

includes lodging, meals, and 

transportation expenses, as well as 

personal information. It includes 

sensitive information. 

6. Panel Invoice Form (Honorarium 

Form)—USDA uses this form to 

document the transfer of an honorarium 

to a peer reviewer. Reviewers receive 

honoraria as compensation for serving 

as peer review panelists. This form 

requires an original signature. It is used 

only in special circumstances where 

reviewers cannot accept a direct bank 

transfer of the honorarium. In such 

cases this is used in lieu of the SF–1034 

to provide the OSQR a written record of 

the honorarium payment. Collection of 

information on the Honorarium Form is 

needed to document the transfer of an 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 103 / Monday, June 1, 2009 / Notices 26187 

honorarium to the peer reviewer in 

those rare cases where an SF–1034 is 

not completed. It contains personally 

identifiable information. 

Estimate of Burden: The burden 

associated with this approval process is 

the minimum required to achieve 

program objectives. The information 

collection frequency is the minimum 

consistent with program objectives. The 

following estimates of time required to 

complete the forms are based on OSQR’s 

experience in working with reviewers 

and accepting their input into our 

procedures. 

1. Confidentiality Agreement Form: 

This form takes 10–15 minutes to 

complete. It only requires a signature 

and date, but the reviewer must read the 

terms of the agreement. 

2. Panelist Information Form: This 

form takes about 20 minutes to 

complete. It resembles a typical request 

for personal information; many 

reviewers provide the same data as grant 

reviewers in other peer review 

programs. 

3. Peer Review of an ARS Research 

Project Form (Peer Review Form): This 

form takes 5–7 hours to complete. 

Because this is a review, the page length 

significantly varies. Reviewers are free 

to write as much as they wish, but to 

complete the form they must thoroughly 

read and evaluate a research project 

plan that may exceed 50 pages in length. 

4. Recommendations for ARS 

Research Project Form 

(Recommendations Form): This form 

takes 1–2 hours to complete. Because 

this is a review, the page length 

significantly varies. Reviewers are free 

to write as much as they wish. The form 

is prepared by one reviewer combining 

comments from two of the reviewers as 

found on the Peer Review Form as well 

as adding further analyses derived from 

discussion with other reviewers. 

5. Panel Expense Report Form 

(Expense Report): This form takes 10–12 

minutes to complete. 

6. Panel Invoice Form (Honorarium 

Form): This form takes 3–5 minutes to 

complete. This form has the reviewer’s 

personal information pre-filled and the 

reviewer only verifies its accuracy and 

signs. 

Respondents and Estimated Number 

of Respondents: Scientific experts, 

currently working in the same 

discipline as the research projects under 

review, are selected to review research 

projects. These experts are notable peers 

within and external to the ARS. 

Annually, about 150 peer reviewers 

complete these forms. Ad hoc reviewers 

are paid a modest honorarium but 

generally do not travel to meet with 

other reviewers; and thus they do not 

complete Expense Report and Invoice 

Forms. On occasion, ad hoc reviewers 

may participate in a Web-based panel, 

thus necessitating completion of an 

either an SF–1034 or an Honorarium 

Form. Ad hoc reviewers, retained for 

special situations, will make up about 

20 percent of all the reviewers retained 

annually. 

Frequency of Response: 

Form Number of 

respondents Annual frequency 

Confidentiality Agreement ............................................................. 130 1 per respondent (Total of 130). 

Peer Review Form (Required for all reviewers and they have 1– 

4 review assignments on average.) 

130 3–4 per panel respondent and 1 per Ad Hoc Respondent (Total 

of 450). 

Expense Report ............................................................................ 100 1 per respondent (Total of 100). 

Honorarium Form .......................................................................... 20 1 per respondent (Total of 20). 

Panelist Information Forms ........................................................... 130 1 per respondent for each form (Total of 130). 

Recommendations Form (Required on panel reviews, whereby 

comments from the peer review form are combined into one 

file.) 

75 2.5 per respondent (Total of 200). 

Estimated Total Annual Burden on 

Respondents: 

Form 

(Estimate of time required to complete) 

Number 

completed 

annually 

Total burden 

(hr.) 

Confidentiality Agreement (12 min.) ........................................................................................................................ 130 26 

Peer Review Forms (5 hrs) ..................................................................................................................................... 450 2250 

Panelist Information Forms (20 min.) ...................................................................................................................... 150 50 

Recommendations Form (1 hr) ............................................................................................................................... 220 220 

Honorarium Form (3 min.) ....................................................................................................................................... 20 1 

Expense Report (10 min.) ....................................................................................................................................... 150 25 

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 affected 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. 

Dated: May 5, 2009. 

Antoinette Betschart, 

Associate Administrator, Research, 

Management and Operations, Agricultural 

Research Service, USDA. 

[FR Doc. E9–12597 Filed 5–29–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–03–P