[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 69 (Tuesday, April 12, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19097-19102]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-7278]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

MORRIS K. UDALL SCHOLARSHIP AND EXCELLENCE IN NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL 
POLICY FOUNDATION


The United States Institute for Environmental Conflict 
Resolution; Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for 
OMB Review; Comment Request: See List of Evaluation Related ICRs in 
Section A

AGENCY: Morris K. Udall Scholarship and Excellence in National 
Environmental Policy Foundation, U.S. Institute for Environmental 
Conflict Resolution

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act and supporting 
regulations, this document announces that the U.S. Institute for 
Environmental Conflict Resolution (the U.S. Institute), part of the 
Morris K. Udall Foundation, is submitting to the Office of Management 
and Budget (OMB) six Information Collection Requests (ICRs). Five of 
the six ICRs are for revisions to currently approved collections due to 
expire 06/30/2005 (OMB control numbers 3320-0003, 3320-0004, 3320-0005, 
3320-0006, and 3320-0007). One ICR pertains to a new collection 
request. The six ICRs are being consolidated under a single filing to 
provide a more coherent picture of information collection activities 
designed primarily to measure performance. The proposed collections are 
necessary to support program evaluation activities. The collection is 
expected neither to have a significant economic impact on respondents, 
nor to affect a substantial number of small entities. The average cost 
(in time spent) per respondent is estimated to be 0.16 hours/$6.18. 
Each ICR describes the authority and need for program evaluation, the 
nature and use of the information to be collected, the expected burden 
and cost to respondents and the U.S. Institute, and how the evaluation 
results will be made available. The ICRs also contain the specific 
questionnaires that will be used to collect the information for each 
program area. Approval is being sought for each ICR separately, and 
information collection will begin for each program area once OMB has 
approved the respective ICR. The U.S. Institute published a Federal 
Register notice on February 2, 2005, 70 FR, pages 5489-5494, to solicit 
public comments for a 60-day period. The U.S. Institute received one 
comment. The comment and the U.S. Institute's response are included in 
the ICRs. The purpose of this notice is to allow an additional 30 days 
for public comments regarding these ICRs.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before May 12, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Direct comments to: Office of Information and Regulatory 
Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Attention: Keith 
Belton, 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503, Desk Officer for 
The Morris K. Udall Scholarship and Excellence in National 
Environmental Policy Foundation, U.S. Institute for Environmental 
Conflict Resolution [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Technical details of the U.S. 
Institute's program evaluation system are contained in a January 2005 
design document entitled ``Program Evaluation System at the U.S. 
Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution''. Paper copies of this 
report can be obtained by contacting the U.S. Institute; an electronic 
copy can be downloaded from the U.S. Institute's website: http://www.ecr.gov/multiagency/program_eval.htm.
    For further information or a copy of the ICRs, contact: Patricia 
Orr, Evaluation Coordinator, U.S. Institute for Environmental Conflict 
Resolution, 130 South Scott Avenue, Tucson, Arizona 85701, Fax: 520-
670-5530, Phone: 520-670-5658, E-mail: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Overview

    To comply with the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) 
(Pub. L. 103-62), the U.S. Institute for Environmental Conflict 
Resolution, as part of the Morris K. Udall Foundation, is required to 
produce, each year, an Annual Performance Budget and an Annual 
Performance and Accountability Report, linked directly to the goals and 
objectives outlined in the U.S. Institute's five-year Strategic Plan. 
The U.S. Institute's evaluation system is key to evaluating progress 
towards achieving its performance commitments. The U.S. Institute is 
committed to evaluating all of its projects, programs and services not 
only to measure and report on performance but also to use this 
information to learn from and improve its services. The refined 
evaluation system has been

[[Page 19098]]

carefully designed to support efficient and economical generation, 
analysis and use of this much-needed information, with an emphasis on 
performance measurement, learning and improvement.
    As part of the program evaluation system, the U.S. Institute 
intends to collect specific information from participants in, and users 
of, several of its programs and services. Specifically, six programs 
and services are the subject of this Federal Notice: (1) Mediation and 
facilitation services; (2) situation/conflict assessment services; (3) 
training and workshop services; (4) facilitated meeting services; (5) 
the roster program services; and (6) program support and system design 
services. Evaluations will mainly involve administering questionnaires 
to process participants and professionals, as well as members and users 
of the National Roster. Responses by members of the public to the 
Institute's request for information (i.e., questionnaires) will be 
voluntary.
    In 2003, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Conflict 
Prevention and Resolution Center (CPRC) was granted the approval of the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to act as a named administrator 
of the U.S. Institute's currently approved information collections for 
evaluation. The CPRC and the U.S. Institute are seeking approval as 
part of this proposed collection to continue this evaluation 
partnership. Other agencies have approached the U.S. Institute seeking 
(a) evaluation services and (b) assistance in establishing their own 
internal evaluation systems. In contrast to the U.S. Institute's 
relationship with CPRC, these agencies are requesting the U.S. 
Institute to administer its evaluation questionnaires on their behalf. 
Therefore, the U.S. Institute is requesting OMB approval to administer 
the evaluation questionnaires on behalf of other agencies. One agency, 
the Department of Interior (Office of Collaborative Action and Dispute 
Resolution) has already requested such evaluation services through its 
interagency agreement with the U.S. Institute. The U.S. Institute is 
seeking approval to make minor conforming revisions to questionnaires 
to allow for the broader application of the instruments (e.g., change 
return address on cover).
    The burden estimates in the ICRs take into consideration the multi-
agency usage of the evaluation instruments. The broad interest in the 
U.S. Institute's evaluation system has fostered an evaluation 
collaborative among several state and federal agencies. The sharing of 
evaluation resources and expertise is advantageous on several fronts: 
(a) Design and development efforts are not duplicated across agencies; 
(b) common methods for evaluating collaborative processes are 
established; (c) knowledge, expertise and resources are shared, 
realizing cost-efficiencies for the collaborating agencies; and (d) 
learning and improvement on a broader scale will be facilitated through 
the sharing of comparable multi-agency findings.

Key Issues

    The U.S. Institute would appreciate receiving comments that can be 
used to:
    i. Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is 
necessary for the proper performance of the U.S. Institute, including 
whether the information will have practical utility;
    ii. Determine whether the nature and extent of the proposed level 
of anonymity for those from whom the U.S. Institute will be collecting 
information is adequate and appropriate;
    iii. Evaluate the accuracy of the U.S. Institute's estimate of the 
burden associated with the proposed information collection activities;
    iv. Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to 
be collected;
    v. Minimize the burden of the information collection on those who 
are to respond, including suggestions concerning use of automated 
collection techniques or other forms of information technology (e.g., 
allowing electronic submission of responses).

Burden

    The average estimated burden for each response is 0.16 hours/$6.18. 
As used in this document, ``burden'' means the total time, effort, or 
financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, 
disclose or provide information to or for a Federal Agency. This 
includes time needed to: Review instructions; develop, acquire, 
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of 
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and 
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; 
adjust existing ways to comply with any previously applicable 
instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to 
a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review 
the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the 
information. Hour burdens are monetized using fully burdened labor 
rates derived from Bureau of Labor Statistics tables (U.S. Department 
of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, ``Employer Costs for Employee 
Compensation'', Table 2: Civilian workers, by occupational and industry 
group. Available at: http://www.ecr.gov/multiagency/program_eval.htm.

Technical Details

    Five of the six submitted ICRs are for revisions to currently 
approved collections. In 1999, the U.S. Institute, in cooperation with 
the Policy Consensus Initiative and state alternative dispute 
resolution programs, began the task of designing a common program 
evaluation system. After extensively piloting the evaluation 
instruments under the currently approved information collection, staff 
from the U.S. Institute, PCI, Oregon Dispute Resolution Commission, 
Oregon Department of Justice, Florida Conflict Resolution Consortium, 
Environmental Protection Agency (Conflict Prevention and Resolution 
Center), and the Department of Interior (Center for Alternative Dispute 
Resolution) joined forces to refine the evaluation instruments 
(particularly the mediation and facilitation instruments). This effort 
also benefited from input from over 40 practitioners, program 
administrators, evaluators, researchers and trainers. Dr. Kathy 
McKnight and Dr. Lee Sechrest, the University of Arizona, assisted with 
this effort. Evaluation consultant, Dr. Andy Rowe, GHK International, 
guided the earlier evaluation design. Throughout this effort the 
William and Flora Hewlett Foundation provided financial assistance.
    Technical details of the U.S. Institute's program evaluation system 
are contained in a January 2005 design document entitled ``Program 
Evaluation System at the U.S. Institute for Environmental Conflict 
Resolution.'' Paper copies of this report can be obtained by contacting 
the U.S. Institute; an electronic copy can be downloaded from the 
Institute's Web site: http://www.ecr.gov/multiagency/program_eval.htm.
    Information generated from the evaluation system will be used for a 
variety of purposes, including performance measurement and reporting, 
and ongoing improvements to the design and operation of projects and 
services. Primary audiences for results from the evaluation system 
include the Udall Foundation Board of Trustees, Congress and OMB, and 
program management and staff, who will use the information in decision-
making regarding program operations and directions. Secondary audiences 
will likely include practitioners in the field,

[[Page 19099]]

process participants, prospective users, and members of the public.

A. List of ICRs Submitted

    The U.S. Institute submitted six ICRs to OMB, corresponding to 11 
individual questionnaires that will be administered to those involved 
in collaborative problem solving and conflict resolution activities. 
Five of the six ICRs are for revisions to currently approved 
collections. In the listing below, the questionnaires are organized 
into six activity areas, indicating the recipients of the 
questionnaires and, in parentheses, the frequency of administration per 
respondent.
    Mediation/Facilitation Services (OMB control number 3320-0004, 
expiring 06/30/2005).
    (1) Mediations/Facilitations--Participants, at the conclusion of 
the process (once).
    (2) Mediations/Facilitations--Participants, subsequent to the 
conclusion of the process (once).
    (3) Mediations/Facilitations--Facilitators/Mediators (Neutral 
Practitioners) at the conclusion of the process (once);
    Situation/Conflict Assessment Services (OMB control number 3320-
0003, expiring 06/30/2005).
    (4) Assessment--Initiating Organizations and Key Participants, at 
the conclusion of the assessment (once).
    (5) Assessment--Assessor (Neutral Practitioner) at the conclusion 
of the assessment (once);
    Training and Workshop Services (OMB control number 3320-0006, 
expiring 06/30/2005).
    (6) Training/Workshop--Participants, at the conclusion (once).
    Facilitated Meeting Services (OMB control number 3320-0007, 
expiring 06/30/2005).
    (7) Facilitated Meeting--Meeting Attendees, at the conclusion of 
the process (once);
    Roster Program Services (OMB control number 3320-0005, expiring 06/
30/2005).
    (8) Roster--Members (once annually).
    (9) Roster--Users, at the end of the search (once).
    (10) Roster--Users, subsequent to the search (once);
    Program Support and System Design Services (New collection 
request).
    (11) Program Support and System Design--Agency Representatives and 
Key Participants, annually or at the conclusion of the project if the 
project is completed in less than 12 months (once annually for length 
of project).

B. Contact Individual for ICRs

    Patricia Orr, Evaluation Coordinator, U.S. Institute for 
Environmental Conflict Resolution, 130 South Scott Avenue, Tucson, 
Arizona 85701, Fax: 520-670-5530, Phone: 520-670-5658, E-mail: 
[email protected].

C. Confidentiality and Access to Information

    The U.S. Institute is committed to providing agencies, researchers 
and the public with information on the effectiveness of collaborative 
problem solving and conflict resolution processes and the performance 
of the U.S. Institute's programs and services. Access to such useful 
information will be facilitated to the extent possible. The U.S. 
Institute will strive to report all information in an open and 
transparent manner. The U.S. Institute is also committed, however, to 
managing the collection and reporting of data so as not to interfere 
with any ongoing processes or the subsequent implementation of 
agreements. Project/case specific data will not be released until an 
appropriate time period has passed following conclusion of the project/
case; such time periods will be determined on a case-by-case basis. 
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests will also be evaluated on a 
case-by-case basis.
    To encourage candor and responsiveness on the part of those 
completing the questionnaires, the U.S. Institute intends to report 
information obtained from questionnaires only in the aggregate at a 
case/project or program level. The U.S. Institute also intends to 
withhold the names of respondents and individuals named in responses. 
The U.S. Institute believes such information regarding individuals is 
exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 
pursuant to exemption (b)(6) (5 U.S.C. Section 552(b)(6)), as the 
public interest in disclosure of that information would not outweigh 
the privacy interests of the individuals. Therefore, respondents will 
be afforded anonymity to the extent that names of respondents will not 
be revealed. Furthermore, no substantive case-specific information that 
might be confidential under statute, court order or rules, or agreement 
of the parties will be sought.

D. Information on Individual ICRs

Mediation/Facilitation Services

    A variety of non-adversarial, participatory processes are available 
as adjuncts or alternatives to conventional forums for solving 
environmental problems or resolving environmental conflicts. Such 
collaborative processes range broadly depending on the nature of the 
problem/dispute and the parties involved as well as their context (for 
example, early on in planning processes, when seeking administrative 
relief, or during litigation). Under the right circumstances, a well-
designed collaborative process facilitated or mediated by the 
appropriate mediator/facilitator (neutral practitioner) can effectively 
assist parties in reaching agreement on plans, proposals, and 
recommendations to solve their problem or resolve their dispute. 
Collaborative processes can also result in improvement in relationships 
among the parties, and increase capacity among the parties to manage or 
resolve the issue or dispute. The following survey instruments have 
been designed for use across the broad range of collaborative 
processes, be it a process to reach agreement on a plan or a set of 
recommendations or environmental mediation to resolve a dispute.
    (1) Mediation/Facilitation Process--Participants End-of-Process 
Questionnaire; Revision of a currently approved collection; Abstract: 
Immediately following conclusion of a mediation/facilitation process, 
the participants that have been involved will be surveyed once, via 
questionnaire, to determine their views on a variety of issues. Topics 
to be investigated include: Are the parties now more likely to consider 
collaborative processes in the future; were the appropriate 
participants effectively engaged; did the participants have the 
capacity to engage in the process; was the mediator/facilitator that 
guided the process appropriate; and did all participants have access to 
relevant information? The voluntary questionnaire contains 27 questions 
requiring respondents to provide fill-in-the blank and open-ended 
responses. Information from the questionnaire will provide the 
opportunity to evaluate if the intended outcomes were achieved, and if 
so or not, why. Affected Entities: Entities potentially affected by 
this action are parties to the collaborative processes. Burden 
Statement: It is estimated that the annual national public burden and 
associated costs will be approximately 600 hours and $23,400 
respectively. These values were calculated assuming that on average: 
(a) Participants require 20 minutes per questionnaire; (b) there are 12 
respondents per case; (c) respondents are requested to complete this 
survey only once; and (d) there will be 150 cases evaluated each year. 
Cost burden estimates assume: (a) There are no capital or start-up 
costs for respondents, and (b) respondents' time is valued at $39/hr.

[[Page 19100]]

    (2) Mediation/Facilitation Process--Participants Follow-up 
Questionnaire; Revision of a currently approved collection; Abstract: 
To gain information concerning the longer-term effectiveness of the 
mediation/facilitation process, a follow-up questionnaire will be 
administered to the parties at a future date following conclusion of 
the process. Topics to be examined include: Do all participants 
perceive an improvement in their collective relationships; is the 
agreement durable. The voluntary questionnaire contains 12 questions 
requiring respondents to provide fill-in-the blank and open-ended 
responses. Information from the questionnaire will permit U.S. 
Institute staff to evaluate if the process outcomes were sustainable, 
and if not, why not. The information will also facilitate the 
assessment of the longer-term impacts of the collaborative processes 
and agreements. Affected Entities: Entities potentially affected by 
this action are participants to mediations/facilitations. Burden 
Statement: It is estimated that the annual national public burden and 
associated costs will be approximately 300 hours and $11,700, 
respectively. These values were calculated assuming that on average: 
(a) Participants require 10 minutes per questionnaire; (b) there are 
approximately 12 respondents per project; (c) respondents are asked to 
complete this questionnaire only once; and (d) there will be 150 cases 
evaluated each year. Cost burden estimates assume: (a) There are no 
capital or start-up costs for respondents, and (b) respondents' time is 
valued at $39/hr.
    (3) Mediation/Facilitation Process--Mediator/Facilitator (Neutral 
Practitioner) Questionnaire; Revision of a currently approved 
collection; Abstract: Immediately following conclusion of a mediation/
facilitation process, the mediator(s)/facilitator(s) will be surveyed 
once, via questionnaire, to determine their views on a variety of 
issues. Topics to be investigated include: Was the collaborative 
approach well suited to the nature of the issues in conflict; were all 
key parties consulted, and, were all key issues and alternatives 
properly identified and considered? In most cases, it will be specified 
in the mediator/facilitator contracts that they are required to 
complete the questionnaire. The mediator/facilitator questionnaire 
contains 34 questions. Information from this questionnaire will provide 
the opportunity to evaluate if the intended mediation/facilitation 
outcomes/impacts were achieved, and if so or not, why. Affected 
Entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are mediators/
facilitators who are federal agency staff or contracted non-federal 
professionals. Burden Statement: It is estimated that the annual 
national public burden and associated costs will be approximately 100 
hours and $3,900, respectively. These values were calculated assuming 
that on average: (a) Mediators/facilitators will require 30 minutes per 
questionnaire; (b) there are 2 respondents per project; (c) respondents 
are surveyed only once; and (d) there will be 100 cases evaluated each 
year (Note: The EPA's CPRC does not require ICR clearance to evaluate 
its cases using this instrument. The CPRC mediators/facilitators will 
be paid under contract to complete the evaluation questionnaires). Cost 
burden estimates assume: (a) There are no capital or start-up costs for 
respondents, and (b) respondents' time is valued at $39/hr.

Situation/Conflict Assessment Services

    Situation or conflict assessments are conducted by a neutral party 
and include a series of confidential interviews in person or on the 
telephone with individuals or groups of parties. Through such 
assessments, assessors (neutral practitioners) identify and clarify key 
issues and parties, and assess the appropriateness of a mediation/
facilitation process and its potential for helping the parties reach 
agreement. Assessment reports seek to clarify and communicate in a 
neutral manner the issues and concerns of all parties, and commonly 
conclude with process design recommendations intended to provide the 
parties with one or more options for effectively collaborating to find 
a solution to their conflict.
    (4) Assessment--Initiating Organization/Key Participant 
Questionnaire; Revision of a currently approved collection; Abstract: 
Immediately following conclusion of a situation/conflict assessment 
process, the initiating agencies/organization(s) and key participants 
will be surveyed once via questionnaire to determine their views on a 
variety of issues. Topics to be investigated include: Was the conflict 
assessment approach well suited to the nature of the issues in 
conflict; was the selected assessor (neutral practitioner) appropriate 
for the assignment; were all key parties consulted, and, were all key 
issues and alternatives properly identified and considered? The 
voluntary questionnaire contains 11 questions requiring respondents to 
provide fill-in-the blank and open-ended responses. Information from 
the questionnaire provides the opportunity to: (a) Evaluate the 
performance for specific cases/projects; (b) evaluate the performance 
of assessment programs; and (c) use the evaluation feedback as a 
learning tool to improve the design of future assessment cases/
projects. Affected Entities: Entities potentially affected by this 
action are individuals in initiating and other key organizations that 
participate in a conflict assessment. Burden Statement: It is estimated 
that the annual national public burden and associated costs will be 
approximately 62.5 hours and $2,437 respectively. These values were 
calculated assuming that on average: (a) Respondents require 10 minutes 
per questionnaire; (b) there are 5 respondents per project (c) 
respondents are surveyed only once; and (d) there will be 75 
assessments evaluated each year. Cost burden estimates assume: (a) 
there are no capital or start-up costs for respondents, and (b) 
respondents' time is valued at $39/hr.
    (5) Assessment--Assessor (Neutral Practitioner) Questionnaire; 
Revision of a currently approved collection; Abstract: Immediately 
following conclusion of a situation/conflict assessment, the selected 
assessor(s) will be surveyed once via questionnaire to determine their 
views on a variety of issues. Topics to be investigated include: Was 
the conflict assessment approach well suited to the nature of the 
issues in conflict; was assisted negotiation recommended; and, was the 
recommendation followed? In most cases, it will be specified in the 
assessor's contract that the assessor will be required to complete the 
questionnaire. The assessor's questionnaire contains nine questions 
requiring respondents to provide fill-in-the blank and open-ended 
responses. Information from the questionnaire will permit the agency 
staff to evaluate the assessment process and outcomes, and learn from 
and improve the design of future assessment projects. Affected 
Entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are assessors 
who either are staff from or have been contracted by the agency. Burden 
Statement: It is estimated that the annual national public burden and 
associated costs will be approximately 5 hours and $195, respectively. 
These values were calculated assuming that on average: (a) Assessors 
require 6 minutes per questionnaire; (b) there is one respondent per 
project; (c) respondents are surveyed only once; and (d) there will be 
50 assessments evaluated each year (Note: The EPA's CPRC does not 
require ICR clearance to evaluate its cases using this instrument. The 
CPRC assessors are paid under contract to complete the evaluation 
questionnaires). Cost burden estimates assume: (a) There

[[Page 19101]]

are no capital or start-up costs for respondents, and (b) respondents' 
time is valued at $39/hr.

Training and Workshop Services

    Training and workshop sessions are conducted by agency staff and 
contractors for a variety of audiences. The subject of training and 
workshop sessions varies widely, depending on the participants and 
their specific training needs. In general, the training and workshop 
sessions are designed to increase the appropriate and effective use of 
collaborative problem solving and conflict resolution processes.
    (6) Training/Workshop--Participants Questionnaire, at the 
conclusion of the training/workshop; Revision of a currently approved 
collection; Abstract: Training participants will be asked to complete a 
voluntary questionnaire at the end of the training or workshop session. 
Participation is voluntary and the survey instrument contains seven 
questions, requiring responses to fill-in-the-blank and open-ended 
questions. Topics to be evaluated include whether: The training 
objectives were clear and understood by the participants; an 
appropriate trainer(s)/facilitator(s) guided the session; participants 
were engaged appropriately; participants gained unable knowledge. 
Affected Entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are 
individuals who participate in training/workshop sessions. Burden 
Statement: It is estimated that the annual national public burden and 
associated costs will be approximately 195 hours and $7,605, 
respectively. These values were calculated assuming that on average: 
(a) Training participants require 6 minutes to complete this 
questionnaire; and (b) there will be 1,950 participants evaluated each 
year. Cost burden estimates assume: (a) There are no capital or start-
up costs for respondents, and (b) respondents' time is valued at $39/
hr.

Facilitated Meeting Services

    Agency staff and contractors facilitate and provide leadership for 
many meetings, ranging from small group meetings to large public 
convenings of several hundred attendees. The purpose of the facilitated 
meetings varies widely, depending on the attendees and their specific 
meeting objectives.
    (7) Meeting Facilitation--Participants Questionnaire, at the 
conclusion of the meeting; Revision of a currently approved collection; 
Abstract: Participants at facilitated meetings run by agency staff or 
contractors will be asked to complete a voluntary questionnaire at the 
conclusion of the meeting. The questionnaire used in this case contains 
seven questions, requiring fill-in-the blank and open-ended responses. 
Information from this questionnaire will help evaluate the 
effectiveness of meeting design, effectiveness of facilitator(s), and 
meeting accomplishments. Affected Entities: Entities potentially 
affected by this action are individuals who participate in these 
meetings. Burden Statement: It is estimated that the annual national 
public burden and associated costs will be approximately 351 hours and 
$13,689, respectively. These values were calculated assuming that on 
average: (a) Meeting attendees require 6 minutes to complete the 
questionnaire, and (b) there will be 3,510 participants evaluated each 
year. Cost burden estimates assume: (a) There are no capital or start-
up costs for respondents, and (b) respondents' time is valued at $39/
hr.

Roster Program Services

    The U.S. Institute has a full-time Roster Manager who supervises a 
Roster Program consisting of two main components: Design and operation 
of the National Roster of Environmental Dispute Resolution and 
Consensus Building Professionals and an associated referral system. 
Membership on the roster remains open to new applicants at all times. 
Potential members apply on-line and are required to provide information 
that demonstrates a level of training and experience adequate to meet 
specific, objective entry criteria. First constituted in February 2000, 
the roster currently includes over 250 members nationwide. When making 
referrals and locating neutral practitioners for sub-contracting, the 
U.S. Institute uses the roster as a primary source to identify 
experienced individuals, particularly in the locale of the project or 
dispute (as required by the U.S. Institute's enabling legislation). The 
public now has direct access to the roster search system via the 
Internet. When requested by any party, the Roster Manager also provides 
advice and assistance regarding selection of appropriate practitioners.
    (8) Roster--Members Questionnaire; Revision of a currently approved 
collection; Abstract: On an annual basis roster members will be 
surveyed to evaluate their perceptions of the roster and to solicit 
their feedback on how the roster program can be improved. This 
voluntary questionnaire contains two questions, requiring fill-in-the 
blank and open-ended responses. Information from this questionnaire 
will permit U.S. Institute staff to evaluate how well the Roster is 
performing in meeting the needs of roster members. Affected Entities: 
Entities potentially affected by this action are roster members. Burden 
Statement: It is estimated that the annual national public burden and 
associated costs will be approximately 25 hours and $975, respectively. 
These values were calculated assuming that on average: (a) Roster 
members require 5 minutes per questionnaire; (b) 300 roster members 
will respond per year; (c) respondents are surveyed only once annually. 
Cost burden estimates assume: (a) There are no capital or start-up 
costs for respondents, and (b) respondents' time is valued at $39/hr.
    (9) Roster--Questionnaire for Users After Each Roster Search; 
Revision of a currently approved collection; Abstract: Users who search 
the roster will be surveyed once for each new roster search. This 
voluntary questionnaire contains four questions, requiring simple fill-
in-the blank and open-ended responses. Information from this 
questionnaire will permit U.S. Institute staff to evaluate how well the 
Roster is performing in meeting the needs of those searching the 
roster. Affected Entities: Entities potentially affected by this action 
are individuals who use the roster search system. Burden Statement: It 
is estimated that the annual national public burden and associated 
costs will be approximately 50 hours and $1,950 respectively. These 
values were calculated assuming that on average: (a) Roster searchers 
require six minutes to complete the questionnaire; (b) there will be 
500 searches per year; and (c) searchers are asked to complete this 
questionnaire once per search. Cost burden estimates assume: (a) There 
are no capital or start-up costs for respondents, and (b) respondents' 
time is valued at $39/hr.
    (10) Roster--User Questionnaire--Follow-Up to Search; Revision of a 
currently approved collection; Abstract: Users of the roster system 
will receive a follow-up questionnaire approximately four weeks after 
their search. This voluntary questionnaire contains five questions, 
requiring fill-in-the blank and open-ended responses. Information from 
this questionnaire will permit U.S. Institute staff to evaluate how 
well the roster program is performing to help users find appropriate 
practitioners. Affected Entities: Entities potentially affected by this 
action are individuals who use the roster search system. Burden 
Statement: It is estimated that the annual national public burden and 
associated costs will be approximately 17 hours and $663, respectively. 
These values were calculated assuming that on average: (a) Users will 
require four minutes to

[[Page 19102]]

complete the questionnaire; (b) there will be 250 follow-up evaluations 
administered each year; and (c) searchers are asked to complete this 
questionnaire once per search. Cost burden estimates assume: (a) There 
are no capital or start-up costs for respondents, and (b) respondents' 
time is valued at $39/hr.

Program Support and System Design Services

    The U.S. Institute provides leadership and assistance to agencies/
organizations developing collaborative problem solving and dispute 
resolution programs and systems. Program development and dispute system 
design services include assistance with planning, developing, 
designing, implementing, evaluating, and/or refining federal 
environmental conflict resolution programs, systems for handling 
administrative disputes, or approaches for managing environmental 
decision making (e.g., with processes under the National Environmental 
Policy Act (NEPA)).
    (11) Program Support and System Design Services--Questionnaire for 
Agency Representatives and Key Participants (annual survey for length 
of project);
    New collection request; Abstract: Agency representatives and key 
project participants who request and receive U.S. Institute program 
support and system design services will be asked to complete a 
voluntary questionnaire containing seven questions. The questionnaire 
will require fill-in-the blank and open-ended responses. Affected 
Entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are individuals 
who benefit from program support and system design services from the 
U.S. Institute. Burden Statement: It is estimated that the annual 
national public burden and associated costs will be approximately six 
hours and $234, respectively. These values were calculated assuming 
that on average: (a) Agency representatives or key project participants 
require six minutes to complete the questionnaire; (b) there will be 60 
responses each year; and (c) on average three agency representatives/
key participants are involved in each initiative. Cost burden estimates 
assume: (a) There are no capital or start-up costs for respondents, and 
(b) respondents' time is valued at $39/hr.

(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 5601-5609)

    Dated: April 6, 2005.
Christopher L. Helms,
Executive Director, Morris K. Udall Foundation.
[FR Doc. 05-7278 Filed 4-11-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820-FN-P