[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 56 (Wednesday, March 24, 1999)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 14348-14350]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-7256]
[[Page 14347]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part IV
Department of Agriculture
_______________________________________________________________________
Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service
_______________________________________________________________________
7 CFR Part 3400
Special Research Grants Programs; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 56 / Wednesday, March 24, 1999 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 14348]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service
7 CFR Part 3400
Special Research Grants Program
AGENCY: Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service,
USDA
ACTION: Proposed Rule
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This proposed rule will amend the Special Research Grants
Program Administrative Regulations to replace references to section 2
of the Act of August 4, 1965, with references to the Competitive,
Special, and Facilities Research Grant Act (CSFRGA), to apply to
competitive and noncompetitive grants, to include extension and
educational activities under the regulation, to shorten the maximum
potential grant award period, to require grantees to arrange for
scientific peer review of their proposed research activities and merit
review of their proposed extension and education activities prior to
award, in accordance with subsection (c)(5) of CSFRGA, as amended by
section 212 of the Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education
Reform Act of 1998 (7 U.S.C. 450i(c)(5)), and to require an annual
report of the results of the research, extension, or education activity
and the merit of the results.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before April 23, 1999.
ADDRESSES: Submit written comments concerning this proposed rule to Dr.
Sally Rockey, Deputy Administrator, Competitive Research Grants and
Awards Management, USDA Cooperative State Research, Education, and
Extension Service, Mail Stop 2240, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW,
Washington, DC 20250-2240; telephone, (202) 401-1761; e-mail,
[email protected].
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Sally Rockey, Deputy
Administrator, at the above address.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 23, 1998, President Clinton signed
into law the Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act
of 1998 (AREERA) (Pub. L. No. 105-185). CSFRGA (formerly section 2 of
the Act of August 4, 1965, Pub. L. No. 89-106, as retitled by Section
401(a) of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act Amendments
of 1991 (FACT Act Amendments), Pub. L. No. 102-237), as amended by
section 212(2) of AREERA, states in subsection (c)(5) that the
Secretary shall make a grant under this authority for a research
activity only if the activity has undergone scientific peer review
arranged by the grantee in accordance with regulations promulgated by
the Secretary. Likewise, subsection (c)(5) of CSFRGA, as amended by
section 212(2) of AREERA, states that the Secretary shall make a grant
under this authority for an extension or education activity only if the
activity has undergone merit review arranged by the grantee in
accordance with regulations promulgated by the Secretary. This proposed
rule is intended to comply with the Secretary's duty to promulgate such
regulations.
The proposed rule expands the scope of these regulations to apply
to all subsection (c) awards, including both competitive and
noncompetitive awards made under this authority. The proposed rule also
revises these regulations to address extension and education activities
in addition to research activities. CSREES determined that expanding
the scope of the existing regulations was preferable compared to the
alternative of having two sets of administrative regulations to govern
the same program. Having only one set of administrative regulations
will result in less confusion of interested parties. Making these
regulations applicable to all subsection (c) awards, including
competitive and noncompetitive grants, is necessary because the
statutory review requirements apply to all grants made under this
authority. The proposed rule clearly delineates in revised Sec. 3400.1
which provisions will apply respectively to competitive and
noncompetitive awards. Subparts A and B, other than Sec. 3400.1, will
continue to apply only to grants awarded under subsection (c)(1)(A).
Subpart C, implementing the review requirements, will apply to all
grants awarded under subsection (c), including both competitive and
noncompetitive awards.
Subpart C of the proposed rule requires that applicants have
research proposals undergo peer review and extension and education
proposals undergo merit review. The program authority emphasizes the
regional or national nature of the funded projects. Consistent with
that emphasis, the review must assess the technical quality and
relevance of the proposed work to regional or national goals. The
proposed regulations also require that any review be credible and
independent. By specifying only basic parameters and not detailed
procedures for review, CSREES aims to provide applicants with maximum
flexibility in determining the timing and use of resources committed
for such review. CSREES, however, has reserved the right in the
proposed regulations to specify the timing of submission of the notice
of completion of review. The agency does not anticipate the need to set
the timing of this notice, but intends only to preserve this option
should CSREES determine that implementation of this regulation required
such action. Flexibility within the review requirements allows
applicants to tailor the nature and character of the review more
appropriately to the size, scope, and duration of the proposed project.
CSREES considers such latitude necessary because of the broad range of
research, education, and extension projects supported under this
authority.
CSREES is proposing a broad definition of ``scientific peer
review.'' For purposes of this grant program, CSREES is implementing
``peer'' to mean ``experts with the scientific knowledge and technical
skills to conduct the proposed research work.'' Again, this provision
aims to allow applicants flexibility in determining who performs the
review while simultaneously imposing the minimum standards that CSREES
believes are necessary to ensure the ability of such persons to review
the technical components of a proposed activity. CSREES also lists
certain persons, such as collaborators, who should not perform the
review because of a direct conflict-of-interest. CSREES includes
similar requirements for merit reviewers based on the same rationale.
Applicants must provide notice acting as certification prior to an
award by CSREES that the review has been completed. Having applicants
submit only a notice of compliance, and not the actual review
documentation or results, aims to minimize the administrative burden on
the applicants. The proposed regulations, however, do require that the
applicant retain the review documentation and, consistent with agency
assistance regulations, such documentation may be subject to agency
inspection.
CSREES has elected not to require peer or merit review for each
renewal or extension of a proposed project either through a renewal
grant, continuation grant, or supplemental grant except under limited
circumstances. These circumstances are: (1) if the funded activity has
changed significantly from the original proposal; (2) if other
scientific discoveries have affected the project; and (3) if the need
for the activity has changed. CSREES will make the final determinations
as to whether any of these three situations exists. Under any of these
three circumstances, a new review will be required before
[[Page 14349]]
CSREES will make a subsequent grant award. Because any grant awarded
under this program statutorily cannot extend beyond three years, a new
review automatically is required every three years before CSREES can
make a new grant award.
Subpart D of the proposed rule requires that recipients submit
annual reports describing the results of the research, extension, or
education activity. The agency currently requires that recipients
submit annual and final performance reports as part of the terms and
conditions of each award. The agency believes that subpart D meets the
reporting requirements contained in section 212 of AREERA.
This proposed rule also makes technical amendments to Part 3400 to
change references to the Act of August 4, 1965, to the Competitive,
Special, and Facilities Research Grant Act as retitled by Section
401(a) of the FACT Act Amendments. The proposed rule also changes the
maximum potential award period for Special Grants from five (5) years
to three (3) years to conform with the amendments in section 212 of
AREERA.
This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order No.
12866, and it has been determined that it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' rule because it will not have an annual effect on
the economy of $100 million or more or adversely and materially affect
a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal
governments or communities. This proposed rule will not create any
serious inconsistencies or otherwise interfere with any actions taken
or planned by another agency. It will not materially alter the
budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees or loan programs
and does not raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or principles set forth in
Executive Order No. 12866. In addition, the Department certifies that
the rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of
small entities as defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act, Pub. L.
96-354 (5 U.S.C. 601-612).
This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order No.
12988, Civil Justice Reform. No retroactive effect is to be given to
this proposed rule. This proposed rule does not require administrative
proceedings before parties may file suit in court.
This proposed rule does not significantly affect the environment.
Therefore, an environmental impact statement is not required under the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321
et seq.).
Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, as
amended, 44 U.S.C. chapter 35, and Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) regulations at 5 CFR Part 1320, the collection of information
requirements for research activities contained in this rule have been
approved under OMB Document Nos. 0524-0022 and 0524-0033. When
appropriations are made available for extension and education
activities under this program, CSREES will fully comply with the
Paperwork Reduction Act and submit a revision to the collection of
information requirements to include these activities. Comments from
potential applicants on this proposed collection of information may be
submitted to CSREES-USDA; Office of Extramural Programs; Policy and
Program Liaison Staff; Mail Stop 2299; 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W.;
Washington, D.C. 20250-2299 by May 24, 1999, or to the Desk Officer for
Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget, Washington, D.C. 20502. Reference should be made
to the volume, page, and date of this Federal Register publication.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 3400
Grants programs--agriculture, Grants administration.
For the reasons set forth above, CSREES proposes to amend Part 3400
of Chapter XXXIV of Title 7 of the Code of Federal Regulations as
follows:
PART 3400--SPECIAL RESEARCH GRANTS PROGRAM
1. The authority citation for Part 3400 is revised to read as
follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 450i(c).
2. Revise Sec. 3400.1 to read as follows:
Sec. 3400.1 Applicability of regulations
(a) The regulations of this part apply to special research grants
awarded under the authority of subsection (c) of the Competitive,
Special, and Facilities Research Grant Act, as amended (7 U.S.C.
450i(c)), to facilitate or expand promising breakthroughs in areas of
the food and agricultural sciences of importance to the United States.
Subparts A and B, excepting this section, apply only to special
research grants awarded under subsection (c)(1)(A) of the Act. Subpart
C, Peer and Merit Review Arranged by Grantees, and Subpart D, Annual
Reports, applies to all grants awarded under subsection (c) of the Act.
(b) Each year the Administrator of CSREES shall determine and
announce through publication of a Notice in such publications as the
Federal Register, professional trade journals, agency or program
handbooks, the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance, or any other
appropriate means, research program areas for which proposals will be
solicited competitively, to the extent that funds are available.
(c) The regulations of this part do not apply to research,
extension or education grants awarded by the Department of Agriculture
under any other authority.
3. Revise Sec. 3400.7(c) by inserting in lieu of the words ``five
(5) years'' the words ``three (3) years'' so that the paragraph is
revised to read as follows:
Sec. 3400.7 Use of funds; changes.
(c) Changes in project period. The project period determined
pursuant to Sec. 3400.5(b) may be extended by the Administrator without
additional financial support for such additional period(s) as the
Administrator determines may be necessary to complete, or fulfill the
purposes of an approved project. Any extension, when combined with the
originally approved or amended project period shall not exceed three
(3) years (the limitation established by statute) and shall be further
conditioned upon prior request by the grantee and approval in writing
by the Department, unless prescribed otherwise in the terms and
conditions of a grant award.
* * * * *
4. Subpart C of Part 3400 is added to read as follows:
Subpart C--Peer and Merit Review Arranged by Grantees
3400.20 Grantee review prior to award.
3400.21 Scientific peer review for research activities.
3400.22 Merit review for education and extension activities.
Subpart C--Peer and Merit Review Arranged by Grantees
Sec. 3400.20 Grantee review prior to award.
(a) Review requirement. Prior to the award of a standard or
continuation grant by CSREES, any proposed project shall have undergone
a review arranged by the grantee as specified in this subpart. For
research projects, such review must be a scientific peer review
conducted in accordance with Sec. 3400.21. For education and extension
projects, such review must be a merit review conducted in accordance
with Sec. 3400.22.
(b) Credible and independent. Review arranged by the grantee must
provide for
[[Page 14350]]
a credible and independent assessment of the proposed project. A
credible review is one that provides an appraisal of technical quality
and relevance sufficient for an organizational representative to make
an informed judgment as to whether the proposal is appropriate for
submission for Federal support. To provide for an independent review,
such review may include USDA employees, but should not be conducted
solely by USDA employees.
(c) Notice of completion and retention of records. A notice of
completion of review shall be conveyed in writing to CSREES either as
part of the submitted proposal or prior to the issuance of an award, at
the option of CSREES. The written notice constitutes certification by
the applicant that a review in compliance with these regulations has
occurred. Applicants are not required to submit results of the review
to CSREES; however, proper documentation of the review process and
results should be retained by the applicant.
(d) Renewal and supplemental grants. Review by the grantee is not
automatically required for renewal or supplemental grants as defined in
Sec. 3400.6. A subsequent grant award will require a new review if,
according to CSREES, either the funded project has changed
significantly, other scientific discoveries have affected the project,
or the need for the project has changed. Note that a new review is
necessary when applying for another standard or continuation grant
after expiration of the grant term.
Sec. 3400.21 Scientific peer review for research activities.
Scientific peer review is an evaluation of a proposed project for
technical quality and relevance to regional or national goals performed
by experts with the scientific knowledge and technical skills to
conduct the proposed research work. Peer reviewers may be selected from
an applicant organization or from outside the organization, but shall
not include principal or co-principal investigators, collaborators or
others involved in the preparation of the application under review.
Sec. 3400.22 Merit review for education and extension activities.
Merit review is an evaluation of a proposed project or elements of
a proposed program whereby the technical quality and relevance to
regional or national goals are assessed. The merit review shall be
performed by peers and other individuals with expertise appropriate to
evaluate the proposed project. Merit reviewers may not include
principals, collaborators or others involved in the preparation of the
application under review.
5. Subpart D of Part 3400 is added to read as follows:
Subpart D--Annual Reports
Sec. 3400.23 Annual reports.
(a) Reporting requirement. Annually, within 30 days of the
anniversary date of each award, the recipient shall submit a report
describing the results of the research, extension, or education
activity and the merit of the results.
(b) Report type and content. Unless otherwise stipulated, grant
recipients will have met the reporting requirement under this subpart
by complying with the reporting requirements as set forth in the terms
and conditions of the grant at the time of award.
Done at Washington, D.C., on this 19th day of March, 1999.
I. Miley Gonzalez,
Under Secretary, Research, Education and Economics.
[FR Doc. 99-7256 Filed 3-23-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-22-P