[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 214 (Monday, November 6, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56098-56102]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-27436]
[[Page 56097]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part III
Department of Agriculture
_______________________________________________________________________
Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service
_______________________________________________________________________
Special Research Grants Program, Pest Management Alternatives Research;
Fiscal Year 1996; Solicitation of Proposals; Notice
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 214 / Monday, November 6, 1995 /
Notices
[[Page 56098]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service
Special Research Grants Program, Pest Management Alternatives
Research; Fiscal Year 1996; Solicitation of Proposals
Purpose
Proposals are invited for competitive grant awards under the
Special Research Grants Program--Pest Management Alternatives Research
(the ``Program'') for fiscal year (FY) 1996. The purpose of this
Program is to develop alternatives for critical needs to ensure that
farmers, foresters, ranchers and urban pest management specialists and
other users have reliable methods of managing pest problems. Emphasis
is placed on current and potential loss of select pesticides due to
increased worker and food safety and environmental concerns leading to
regulator review and actions, and the loss of pest management practices
due to performance failures such as those caused by genetic changes in
pests.
Authority
The authority for the Program is contained in section 2(c)(1)(A) of
the Act of August 4, 1965, Public Law 89-106, as amended (7 U.S.C.
450i(c)(1)(A)). Under this program, subject to the availability of
funds, the Secretary may make grants, for periods not to exceed five
years, to State agricultural experiment stations, all colleges and
universities, other research institutions and organizations, Federal
agencies, private organizations or corporations, and individuals for
the purpose of conducting research to facilitate or expand promising
breakthroughs in areas of the food and agricultural sciences of
importance to the United States.
Proposals from scientists at non-United States organizations are
not eligible for funding nor are scientists who are directly or
indirectly engaged in the registration of pesticides for profit;
however, their collaboration with funded projects is encouraged.
Available Funding
Subject to the availability of funds, the anticipated amount
available for support of the program in FY 1996 is $1,584,000.
Proposals should be for no more than a two-year period.
It is expected that Congress, in the final version of the
Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and
Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1996 (H.R. 1976), will prohibit
CSREES from using the funds available for FY 1996 to pay indirect costs
exceeding 14 per centum of the total Federal funds provided under each
award on competitively-awarded research grants.
In addition, it is expected that, pursuant to the final version of
the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and
Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1996 (H.R. 1976), in the case of
any equipment or product that may be authorized to be purchased with
the funds provided under this Program, entities will be encouraged to
use such funds to purchase only American-made equipment or products.
Program Description
This program implements the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
between the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) signed August 15, 1994, that
establishes a coordinated framework for collaborative efforts to
develop, implement, and make available pest management alternatives and
practices. In this MOU, the USDA and USEPA agreed to: (1) Cooperate in
providing for agricultural pest management that is conducted in the
most environmentally-sound manner possible, with sufficient pest
management alternatives to reduce risks to human health and the
environment, to reduce the incidence of pest resistance to pesticides,
and to ensure economical agricultural production; and (2) cooperate in
establishing a process to conduct the research, technology transfer and
registration activities necessary to ensure adequate pest management
alternatives are available to agricultural users to meet important
agricultural needs for situations in which regulatory action would
result in pest management problems.
Applicable Regulations
This Program is subject to the administrative provisions for the
Special Research Grants Program found in 7 CFR part 3400 (56 FR 58147,
November 15, 1991), which set forth procedures to be followed when
submitting grant proposals, rules governing the evaluation of
proposals, the awarding of grants, and post-award administration of
such grants. Several other Federal statutes and regulations apply to
grant proposals considered for review or to grants awarded under the
Program. These include, but are not limited to:
7 CFR Part 1.1--USDA implementation of the Freedom of Information Act;
7 CFR Part 1c--USDA implementation of the Federal Policy for the
Protection of Human Subjects;
7 CFR Part 3--USDA implementation of OMB Circular A-129 regarding debt
collection;
7 CFR Part 15, Subpart A--USDA implementation of Title VI of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964;
7 CFR Part 3015, as amended--USDA Uniform Federal Assistance
Regulations, implementing OMB directives (i.e., Circular Nos. A-21, and
A-122) and incorporating provisions of 31 U.S.C. 6301-6308 (formerly,
the Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act of 1977, Pub. L. No.
95-224), as well as general policy requirements applicable to
recipients of Departmental financial assistance;
7 CFR Part 3016--USDA Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants
and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments; 7 CFR Part
3017, as amended--USDA implementation of Governmentwide Debarment and
Suspension (Nonprocurement) and Governmentwide Requirements for Drug-
Free Workplace (Grants);
7 CFR Part 3018--USDA implementation of New Restrictions on Lobbying.
Imposes new prohibitions and requirements for disclosure and
certification related to lobbying on recipients of Federal contracts,
grants, cooperative agreements, and loans;
7 CFR Part 3019--USDA Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants
and Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and
Other Non-Profit Organizations implementing OMB Circular A-110;
7 CFR Part 3051--Audits of Institutions of Higher Education and Other
Nonprofit Institutions;
7 CFR Part 3407--CSREES implementation of the National Environmental
Policy Act;
29 U.S.C. 794 section 504--Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and 7 CFR Part
15B (USDA implementation of the statute), prohibiting discrimination
based upon physical or mental handicap in federally assisted programs;
35 U.S.C. 200 et seq.--Bayh-Dole Act, controlling allocation of rights
to inventions made by employees of small business firms and domestic
nonprofit organizations, including universities, in Federally assisted
programs (implementing regulations are contained in 37 CFR part 401).
[[Page 56099]]
Research Categories for FY 1996
The following priority areas have been identified by USDA and USEPA
through interaction with State agricultural experiment station research
and extension faculty via the National Pesticide Impact Assessment
Program and state and regional Integrated Pest Management program. In
addition, commodity groups and producers of affected crops were
involved in the identification of project areas. Needs were identified
to address replacement technologies for pesticides under current and
potential regulatory review for which producers and other users do not
have effective alternatives or where regulatory actions trigger pest
resistance problems that limit Integrated Pest Management options.
Replacements for methyl bromide or pesticide registrations under
regulatory consideration because of the Delaney clause are not
addressed by this request for proposals. The identified priority areas
for FY 1996 projects are:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commodity Pest
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alfalfa................................... Alfalfa weevil.
Artichokes................................ Aphids.
Lygus bugs.
Banana/plaintain.......................... Banana root borer.
Carrots................................... Nematodes.
Celery.................................... Aphids.
Leafminer.
Chinese vegetables........................ Aphids.
Cole crops................................ Aphids.
Cucurbits................................. Cucumber beetle.
Bacterial wilt.
Eggplant.................................. Verticillium wilt.
Ginger.................................... Nematodes.
Grapes.................................... Grape phlloxera.
Mealybugs.
Leafy vegetables.......................... Aphids.
Lettuce................................... Aphids.
Downey mildew.
Mushrooms................................. Phoridae and sciaridae
flies.
Parsley................................... Aphids.
Pecans.................................... Pecan scab.
Rice...................................... Rice water weevils.
Sorghum................................... Chinch bug.
Spinach................................... Aphids.
Grasshoppers.
Webworm.
Sugar beets............................... White grubs.
Cercospora leaf spot.
Sugar cane................................ Weeds.
Sweetpotatoes............................. Nematodes.
Tropical fruits........................... Weeds.
Turf...................................... Weeds.
Wheat..................................... Grasshoppers.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mite management in alfalfa seed production, apples, apricots,
beans-green, beans-dry, citrus, clover seed production, cranberry,
figs, grapes, hops, mint, nectarines, peaches, peanut, potatoes, plums,
prunes, strawberries in some locations.
Projects dealing with other crops and pest combinations will be
considered. The critical need of the alternative based on current or
potential regulatory status or pest resistance will have to be clearly
documented and justified for all proposals.
The proposal should address:
(1) Identification, estimation of economic value, and documentation
of the pest management problem and losses associated with the pest(s).
(2) Analysis of the availability of options and their applicability
as possible solutions including their compatibility with integrated
management systems.
(3) Explicit documentation is needed to qualify the project
emphasizing environmental issues, human safety, or resistance
management concerns which make the present management options
impractical.
(4) A summary of past research or extension activities that
demonstrate the practicability of the proposed alternative(s).
(5) A detailed plan for the research, education and technology
transfer to achieve the alternative development and field
implementation with identified milestones.
(6) An analysis of the durability of the proposed option and the
technologic and economic feasibility of the proposed solution.
(7) Demonstrated growers' involvement in the identification of
potential approaches to solutions and the opportunity for public/
private partnerships and matching resources from grower or commodity
groups.
(8) An overview of the availability of natural controls
(biological, cultural, and host resistance) as solutions or partial
solutions to the pest management problem and compatibility with IPM or
crop management systems. This Program will not support basic plant
breeding or other tactics where significant progress toward
implementation cannot be accomplished within two years. However, this
program will support research on the incorporation of pest resistant
cultivars into a production system.
(9) Where registrations of new management options by state and
Federal agencies are required, the proposal should describe the
collaborative actions being taken with regulators which leads toward
registration and use of Good Laboratory Practices (GLP).
(10) Demonstrate appropriate budget and collaborative funding to
accomplish the proposed project.
All projects that involve a new registration of a product or
expanded labelling, must be done in compliance with GLP Standards (40
CFR part 160). IR-4 coordinators are available in every state to advise
or assist with GLP and registration requirements. Projects involving
collaborative registration and funding are encouraged.
Proposal Evaluation
Proposals will be evaluated by the Administrator of CSREES assisted
by a peer panel with Integrated Pest Management expertise. CSREES seeks
proposals which address the following issues: (1) Significant reduction
of risk to human health or the environment would result; (2) no viable
alternatives presently exist and significant potential losses can be
documented; (3) there is significant producer involvement; (4) natural
controls are included as partial or effective solutions to pest
management problems; and (5) solutions can rapidly be brought to bear
on critical problems. Registration considerations must be addressed
where they are required for solution implementation.
1. Executive Summary--10 points
(An evaluation of how well the proposal summary can be understood
by a diverse audience of university personnel, producers, various
public and private groups, budget staff and the general public)
2. Appropriateness of the Budget--5 points
(An evaluation of appropriate and detailed budget request and
collaborative funding to accomplish the proposed project; collaborative
arrangements clearly document)
3. Problem Statement, Background and Rationale--15 points
(Includes the evaluation of significant reduction of risk to human
health or the environment; no viable alternatives presently exist; and
significant potential losses would occur without the alternative(s)
being developed under this proposal)
4. Research, Education & Technology Transfer Plan--40 points
(In addition to the evaluation of a detailed plan for research,
education, and technology transfer and summary of past research or
extension activities that demonstrate the practicability of the
proposed alternative(s), includes the evaluation of whether the
proposed solutions could rapidly be brought to bear on critical
problems and registration considerations are addressed where they are
required for solution implementation)
[[Page 56100]]
5. Producer Involvement--15 points
(Evaluation includes growers' involvement in the identification of
potential approaches to solutions and the opportunity for public/
private partnerships and matching resources from grower or commodity
groups)
6. Professional Competence of the Project Team--5 points
7. Integration of Natural Control Solutions--10 points
(Includes the evaluation that natural controls are included as
partial or effective solutions to the pest management problems being
addressed and an analysis of the durability of the proposed option and
the technologic and economic feasibility of the proposed solution)
Programmatic Contact
For additional information on the Program, please contact: Dr.
Barry Jacobsen, Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension
Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Ag Box 2220, Washington, DC
20250-2220, Telephone: (202) 401-6627.
How To Obtain Application Materials
Copies of this solicitation, the administrative provisions for the
Program (7 CFR part 3400), and the Application Kit, which contains
required forms, certifications, and instructions for preparing and
submitting applications for funding, may be obtained by contacting:
Proposal Services Branch, Awards Management Division, Cooperative
State Research, Education, and Extension Service, U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Ag Box 2245, Washington, DC 20250-2245, Telephone: (202)
401-5048.
Application materials may also be requested via Internet by sending
a message with your name, mailing address (not e-mail) and telephone
number to psb@reeusda.gov that states that you wish to receive a copy
of the application materials for the FY 1996 Special Research Grants
Program--Pest Management Alternatives Research. The materials will then
be mailed to you (not e-mailed) as quickly as possible.
Proposal Format
Members of review committees and the staff expect each project
description to be complete in itself. The administrative provisions
governing the Special Research Grants Program, 7 CFR part 3400, set
forth instructions for the preparation of grant proposals. The
following proposal format requirements deviate from these contained in
section 3400.4(c). The provisions of this solicitation shall apply.
Proposals submitted to the Program should address the described
criteria. Each proposal should provide a detailed plan for the
research, education and technology transfer required to implement the
alternative solution in the field. Involvement of growers or other
users in the project is essential and should be clearly identified.
Proposals should adhere to the following format: items 3-6 should
not exceed 12 single spaced/single-sided pages altogether, using 12
point (10 cpi) letter quality type with 1 inch margins. The pages
should be numbered.
(1) Application for Funding (Form CSREES-661). All full proposals
submitted by eligible applicants should contain an Application for
Funding, Form CSREES-661, which must be singed by the proposed
principal investigator(s) and endorsed by the cognizant Authorized
Organizational Representative who possesses the necessary authority to
commit the applicant's time and other relevant resources. Investigators
who do not sign the full proposal cover sheet will not be listed on the
grant document in the event an award is made. The title of the proposal
must be brief (80-character maximum), yet represent the major emphasis
of the project. Because this title will be used to provide information
to those who may not be familiar with the proposed projected, highly
technical words or phraseology should be avoided where possible. In
addition, phrases such as ``investigation of'' or ``research on''
should not be used.
(2) Executive Summary. Describe the project in terms that can be
understood by a diverse audience of university personnel, producers,
various public and private groups, budget staff and the general public.
This should be no more than one page in length.
(3) Problem Statement. Identify the pest management problem
addressed, its significance and options for solution. Define the
production area addressed by the proposed solution and the potential
applicability to other production regions.
(4) Rationale and Significance. Provide information on the basis
and rationale for the proposed project. Compatibility with current
Integrated Pest Management and crop production practices, technologic
economic feasibility and potential durability should be addressed.
Explicit documentation is needed to qualify the project emphasizing
environmental issues, human safety, or resistance management concerns
that make present management options impractical.
(5) Research, Education and Technology Transfer Plan. Provide a
detailed plan with milestones identified.
(6) Producer Involvement. Provide information on producer or other
user involvement in identification of the proposed solution and
involvement in implementing the proposed solution.
(7) Facilities and Equipment. All facilities and major items of
equipment that are available for use or assignment to the proposed
research project during the requested period of support should be
described. In addition, items of nonexpendable equipment necessary to
conduct and successfully conclude the proposed project should be
listed.
(8) Collaborative Arrangements. If the nature of the proposed
project requires collaboration or subcontractual arrangements with
other research scientists, corporations, organizations, agencies, or
entities, the applicant must identify the collaborator(s) and provide a
full explanation of the nature of the collaboration. Evidence (i.e.,
letters of intent) should be provided to assure peer reviewers that the
collaborators involved have agreed to render this service. In addition,
the proposal must indicate whether or not such collaborative
arrangement(s) has the potential for conflict(s) of interest.
(9) Personnel Support. To assist peer reviewers in assessing the
competence and experience of the proposed project staff, key personnel
who will be involved in the proposed project must be identified
clearly. For each principal investigator involved, and for all senior
associates and other professional personnel who expect to work on the
project, whether or not funds are sought for their support, the
following should be included:
(i) An estimate of the time commitments necessary;
(ii) Curriculum vitae. The curriculum vitae should be limited to a
presentation of academic and research credentials, e.g., educational,
employment and professional history, and honors and awards. Unless
pertinent to the project, to personal status, or to the status of the
organization, meetings attended, seminars given, or personal data such
as birth date, marital status, or community activities should not be
included. The vitae shall be no more than two pages each in length,
excluding the publication lists. The Department reserves the option of
not forwarding for further consideration a proposal in which each vitae
exceeds the two-page limit; and
(iii) Publication List(s). A chronological list of all publications
in referred journals during the past five years, including those in
press, must be provided for each professional project
[[Page 56101]]
member for whom a curriculum vitae is provided. Authors should be
listed in the same order as they appear on each paper cited, along with
the title and complete reference as these items usually appear in
journals.
(10) Budget. A detailed budget is required for each year of
requested support. In addition, a summary budget is required detailing
requested support for the overall project period. A copy of the form
which must be used for this purpose, Form CSREES-55, along with
instructions for completion, is included in the Application Kit and may
be reproduced as needed by applicants. Funds may be requested under any
of the categories listed, provided that the item or service for which
support is requested may be identified as necessary for successful
conduct of the proposed project, is allowable under applicable Federal
cost principles, and is not prohibited under any applicable Federal
statute.
(11) Research Involving Special Considerations. A number of
situations encountered in the conduct of research require special
information and supporting documentation before funding can be approved
for the project. If any such situation is anticipated, the proposal
must so indicate. It is expected that a significant number of proposals
will involve the following:
(i) Recombinant DNA and RNA molecules. All key personnel identified
in a proposal and all endorsing officials of a proposed performing
entity are required to comply with the guidelines established by the
National Institutes of Health entitled, ``Guidelines for Research
Involving Recombinant DNA Molecules,'' as revised. The Application Kit
contains a form which is suitable for such certification of compliance
(Form CSREES-622).
(ii) Human subjects at risk. Responsibility for safeguarding the
rights and welfare of human subjects used in any proposed project
supported with grant funds provided by the Department rests with the
performing entity. Regulations have been issued by the Department under
7 CFR Part 1c, Protection of Human Subjects. In the event that a
project involving human subjects at risk is recommended for award, the
applicant will be required to submit a statement certifying that the
project plan has been reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review
Board at the proposing organization or institution. The Application Kit
contains a form which is suitable for such certification (Form CSREES-
662).
(iii) Experimental vertebrate animal care. The responsibility for
the human care and treatment of any experimental vertebrate animal,
which has the same meaning as ``animal'' in section 2(g) of the Animal
Welfare Act of 1966, as amended (7 U.S.C. 2132(g)), used in any project
supported with grant funds rests with the performing organization. In
this regard, all key personnel associated with any supported project
and all endorsing officials of the proposed performing entity are
required to comply with the applicable provisions of the Animal Welfare
Act of 1966, as amended (7 U.S.C. 2131 et seq.) and the regulations
promulgated thereunder by the Secretary of Agriculture in 9 CFR parts
1, 2, 3, and 4. The applicant must submit a statement certifying that
the proposed project is in compliance with the aforementioned
regulations, and that the proposed project is either under review by or
has been reviewed and approved by an Institutional Animal Care and Use
Committee. The application Kit contains a form which is suitable for
such certification (Form CSREES-662).
(12) Current and Pending Support. All proposals must list any other
current public or private research support (including in-house support)
to which key personnel identified in the proposal have committed
portions of their time, whether or not salary support for the person(s)
involved is included in the budget. Analogous information must be
provided for any pending proposals that are being considered by, or
that will be submitted in the near future to, other possible sponsors,
including other USDA programs or agencies. Concurrent submission of
identical or similar proposals to other possible sponsors will not
prejudice proposal review or evaluation by the Administrator for this
purpose. However, a proposal that duplicates or overlaps substantially
with a proposal already reviewed and funded (or that will be funded) by
another organization or agency will not be funded under this program.
The Application Kit contains a form which is suitable for listing
current and pending support (Form CSREES-663).
(13) Additions to Project Description. Each project description is
expected by the Administrator, the members of peer review groups, and
the relevant program staff to be complete while meeting the page limit
established in this section (Proposal Format). However, if the
inclusion of additional information is necessary to ensure the
equitable evaluation of the proposal (e.g., photographs that do not
reproduce well, reprints, and other pertinent materials that are deemed
to be unsuitable for inclusion in the text of the proposal), 14 copies
of the materials should be submitted. Each set of such materials must
be identified with the name of the submitting organization, and the
name(s) of the principal investigator(s). Information may not be
appended to a proposal to circumvent page limitations prescribed for
the project description. Extraneous materials will not be used during
the peer review process.
(14) Organizational Management Information. Specific management
information relating to an applicant shall be submitted on a one-time
basis prior to the award of a grant for this Program if such
information has not been provided previously under this or another
program for which the sponsoring agency is repsonsible. The Department
will contact an applicant to request organizational management
information once a proposal has been recommended for funding.
Compliance With the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
As outlined in 7 CFR part 3407 (the CSREES regulations implementing
NEPA), environmental data or documentation for any proposed project is
to be provided to CSREES in order to assist CSREES in carrying out its
responsibilities under NEPA. In some cases, however, the preparation of
environmental data or documentation may not be required. Certain
categories of actions are excluded from the requirements of NEPA. The
applicant shall review the following categorical exclusions and
determine if the proposed project may fall within one or more of the
exclusions.
(1) Department of Agriculture Categorical Exclusions (7 CFR 1b.3)
(i) Policy development, planning and implementation which are
related to routine activities such as personnel, organizational
changes, or similar administrative functions;
(ii) Activities which deal solely with the funding of programs,
such as program budget proposals, disbursements, and transfer or
reprogramming of funds;
(iii) Inventories, research activities, and studies, such as
resource inventories and routine data collection when such actions are
clearly limited in context and intensity;
(iv) Educational and informational programs and activities;
(v) Civil and criminal law enforcement and investigative
activities;
(vi) Activities which are advisory and consultative to other
agencies and public private entities; and
(vii) Activities related to trade representation and market
development activities abroad.
[[Page 56102]]
(2) CSREES Categorical Exclusions (7 CFR 3407.6)
Based on previous experience, the following categories of CSREES
actions are excluded because they have been found to have limited scope
and intensity and to have no significant individual or cumulative
impacts on the quality of human environment:
(i) The following categories of research programs or projects
limited size and magnitude with only short-term effects on the
environment:
(A) Research conducted within any laboratory, greenhouse, or other
contained facility where research practices and safeguards prevent
environmental impacts;
(B) Surveys, inventories, and similar studies that have limited
context and minimal intensity in terms of changes in the environment;
and
(C) Testing outside of the laboratory, such as in small isolated
field plots, which involves the routine use of familiar chemicals or
biological materials.
(ii) Routine renovation, rehabilitation, or revitalization of
physical facilities, including the acquisition and installation of
equipment, where such activity is limited in scope and intensity.
In order for CSREES to determine whether any further action is
needed with respect to NEPA (e.g., preparation of an environmental
assessment (EA) or environmental impact statement (EIS)), pertinent
information regarding the possible environmental impacts of a proposed
project is necessary; therefore, the National Environmental Policy Act
Exclusions Form (Form CSREES-1234) provided in the Application Kit must
be included in the proposal indicating whether the applicant is of the
opinion that the project falls within one or more of the categorical
exclusions listed above.
Even though a project may fall within the categorical exclusions,
CSREES may determine that an EA or an EIS is necessary for a proposed
project should substantial controversy on environmental grounds exist
or if other extraordinary conditions or circumstances are present that
may cause a project to have a significant environmental effect.
Proposal Submission
What To Submit
An original and 14 copies of a proposal must be submitted. Each
copy of each proposal must be stapled securely in the upper lefthand
corner (DO NOT BIND). All copies of the proposal must be submitted in
one package.
Where and When To Submit
Proposals must be received by 4:30 p.m. Eastern Standard Time on
December 12, 1995. Proposals sent by First Class mail must be sent to
the following address: Proposal Services Branch, Awards Management
Division, Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service,
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Ag Box 2245, Washington, D.C. 20250-
2245, Telephone: (202) 401-5048.
Proposals that are delivered by Express mail, a courier service, or
by hand must be submitted to the following address (note that the zip
code differs from that shown above): Proposal Services Branch, Awards
Management Division, Cooperative State Research, Education and
Extension Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Room 303, Aerospace
Center, 901 D Street SW., Washington, D.C. 20024, Telephone: (202) 401-
4048.
Supplementary Information
The Special Research Grants Program is listed in the Catalog of
Federal Domestic Assistance Under No. 10.200. For reasons set forth in
the final rule-related Notice to 7 CFR Part 3015, Subpart V (48 FR
29115, June 24, 1983), this Program is excluded from the scope of
Executive Order No. 12372 which requires intergovernmental consultation
with State and local officials. Under the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Action of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3504(h)), the collection of
information requirements contained in this Notice have been approved
under OMB Document No. 0524-0022.
Done at Washington, D.C., on this 31st day of October 1995.
Colien Hefferan,
Acting Administrator, Cooperative State Research, Education, and
Extension Service.
[FR Doc. 95-27436 Filed 11-2-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-22-M
