February 2008
Supporting Statement
Potato Cyst Nematode; Quarantine and Regulations
Docket No. 2006-0143
OMB No. 0579-0322
A. Justification
1. Explain the circumstances that make the collection of information necessary. Identify any legal or administrative requirements that necessitate the collection.
The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), is responsible for preventing plant diseases or insect pests from entering the United States, preventing the spread of pests and noxious weeds not widely distributed in the United States, and eradicating those imported pests when eradication is feasible.
Under the Plant Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 7701 – 7772), the Secretary of Agriculture is authorized to prohibit or restrict the importation, entry, or movement of plants and plant pests to prevent the introduction of plant pests into the United States or their dissemination within the United States.
The PCN (Globodera pallida) is a major pest of potato crops in cool-temperature areas. Other solanaceous hosts include tomatoes, eggplants, peppers, tomatillos, and some weeds. The PCN is thought to have originated in Peru and is now widely distributed in many potato-growing regions of the world. PCN infestations may be expressed as patches of poor growth. Affected potato plants may exhibit yellowing, wilting, or death to foliage. Even with only minor symptoms on the foliage, potato tuber size can be affected.
PCN is a soil-borne pest and is typically spread by the movement of infested soil, either soil itself or soil adhering to plants, farm equipment, or other articles. In some cases, PCN may be transported by wind and flood water.
Allowing these restrictions on the interstate movement of regulated articles will necessitate the use of certain information collection activities such as soil sampling, equipment cleaning, and phone calls to request cleaning of equipment.
APHIS is asking OMB for a 3-year approval for the use of these information collection activities associated with its efforts to prevent the spread of PCN within the United States.
2. Indicate how, by whom, and for what purpose the information is to be used. Except for a new collection, indicate the actual use the agency has made of the information received from the current collection.
Compliance Agreement (PPQ 519) – Any person engaged in growing, handling, or moving regulated articles may enter into a compliance agreement when an inspector determines that the person is aware of this subpart, agrees to comply with its provisions, and agrees to comply with all the provisions contained in the compliance agreement.
Certificates (PPQ Form 540) - Certificates are issued for regulated articles when an inspector finds that, because of certain conditions (e.g., the article is from a field that has been surveyed for PCN by an inspector in the last 3 years and in which PCN has not been found, and no more than one PCN host crop has been grown in the field in the last 3 years), the regulated articles can be moved safely from the quarantined area without spreading PCN. An inspector or person operating under a compliance agreement may issue a certificate for the interstate movement of a regulated article if the inspector determines that the regulated article satisfies the general requirements for a certificate. The PPQ Form 540 is issued by State Regulatory Officials, PPQ, State Plant Health Directors and other approved officials and the following is completed:
Limited Permit (PPQ Form 530) – Limited permits are issued for regulated articles when an inspector finds that because of a possible pest risk, the articles may be safely moved interstate only subject to further restrictions, such as movement to specified destinations and movement for limited purposes. A limited permit will only be issued if the regulated article will be moved in compliance with any additional emergency conditions imposed by the Administrator under 414 of the Plant Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 7714) to prevent the spread of PCN, and if the regulated article is eligible for interstate movement under all other Federal domestic plant quarantines and regulations applicable to the regulated article. The limited permit is filled out by PPQ State Plant Health Directors and other State Regulatory officials.
3. Describe whether, and to what extent, the collection of information involves the use of automated, electronic, mechanical, or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses, and the basis for the decision for adopting this means of collection. Also describe any consideration of using information technology to reduce burden.
PPQ Form 530 and PPQ Form 540 are pressure sensitive and for security purposes not practical for automation. These two forms are also accountable with unique serial numbers on each form which is another reason they are not practical for automation.
PPQ Form 519 is automated and posted at: http://www.aphis.usda.gov/library/forms/index.html
4. Describe efforts to identify duplication. Show specifically why any similar information already available cannot be used or modified for use for the purpose described in item 2 above.
The information APHIS collects is exclusive to its mission to prevent the introduction of plant pests and plant diseases into the United States. The information is not available from any other source.
5. If the collection of information impacts small businesses or other small entities, describe any methods used to minimize burden.
The information APHIS collects is the minimum needed to protect the United States from the introduction of PCN and other plant diseases.
The domestic producers and potato processors affected are predominantly small entities.
6. Describe the consequences to Federal program or policy activities if the collection is not conducted or is conducted less frequently, as well as any technical or legal obstacles to reducing burden.
If APHIS did not collect this information or if APHIS collected this information less frequently, the spread of the PCN in the United States could result in a loss of domestic or foreign markets for U.S. potatoes and other commodities.
7. Explain any special circumstances that require the collection to be conducted in a manner inconsistent with the general information collection guidelines in 5 CFR 1320.5.
This information collection is conducted in a manner consistent with the guidelines established in 5 CFR 1320.5.
8. Describe efforts to consult with persons outside the agency to obtain their views on the availability of data, frequency of collection, the clarity of instructions and recordkeeping, disclosure, or reporting form, and on the data elements to be recorded, disclosed, or reported. If applicable, provide a copy and identify the date and page number of publication in the Federal Register of the agency’s notice, soliciting comments on the information collection prior to submission to OMB.
The following individuals were consulted during 2007:
Mike Cooper
Idaho State Department of Agriculture
2270 Old penitentiary Road
Boise, ID 83701
(208) 334-8629
Pat Kole
Idaho Potato Commission
P.O. Box 1670
Eagle ID 83616
(208) 529-4400
David Smith
Idaho Grower Shippers Association
P.O. Box 51100
Idaho Falls, ID 83405
(208) 529-4400
On Wednesday, September 12, 2007, pages 51975-51988, APHIS published an interim rule and request for comments in the Federal Register. The rule stated its plans to request continuation of a 3-year renewal for this information collection. Three comments from the public were received; however none were dealing with paperwork burden.
9. Explain any decision to provide any payment or gift to respondents, other than reenumeration of contractors or grantees.
This information collection activity involves no payments or gifts to respondents.
10. Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents and the basis for the assurance in stature, regulation, or agency policy.
No additional assurance of confidentiality is provided with this information collection. However, the confidentiality of information is protected under 5 U.S.C. 552a.
11. Provide additional justification for any questions of a sensitive nature, such as sexual behavior and attitudes, religious beliefs, and others that are considered private. This justification should include the reasons why the agency considers the questions necessary, the specific uses to be made of the information, the explanation to be given to persons from whom the information is requested, and any steps to be taken to obtain their consent.
This information collection activity asks no questions of a personal or sensitive nature.
12. Provide estimates of the hour burden of the collection of information. Indicate the number of respondents, frequency of response, annual hour burden, and an explanation of how the burden was estimated.
. Indicate the number of respondents, frequency of response, annual hour burden, and an explanation of how the burden was estimated. If this request for approval covers more than one form, provide separate hour burden estimates for each form and aggregate the hour burdens in Item 13 of OMB Form 83-I.
See APHIS Form 71 for hour burden estimates.
. Provide estimates of annualized cost to respondents for the hour burden for collections of information, identifying and using appropriate wage rate categories.
822 X $17.18 = $14,121.96.
The hourly rate of $17.l8 is derived from the U.S. Department of Lab or, Bureau of Labor Statistics, June 2003 Report on Occupational Wages in the United States (see http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/ocs_nat.htm website).
13. Provide estimates of the total annual cost burden to respondents or recordkeepers resulting from the collection of information, (do not include the cost of any hour burden shown in items 12 and 14). The cost estimates should be split into two components: (a) a total capital and start-up cost component annualized over its expected useful life; and (b) a total operation and maintenance and purchase of services component.
There is zero annual cost burden associated with capital and start-up, operation and maintenance, and purchase of services in connection with this program.
14. Provide estimates of annualized cost to the Federal government. Provide a description of the method used to estimate cost and any other expense that would not have been incurred without this collection of information.
The estimated cost to the Federal Government is $39,182.40 (see APHIS 79).
15. Explain the reasons for any program changes or adjustments reported in Items 13 or 14 of the OMB Form 83-I.
This is an extension of a currently approved collection. There is no change in burden.
16. For collections of information whose results are planned to be published, outline plans for tabulation and publication.
APHIS has no plans to tabulate or publish the information collected.
17. If seeking approval to not display the expiration date for OMB approval of the information collection, explain the reasons that display would be inappropriate.
If forms were to be discarded because of an outdated OMB expiration date, but otherwise usable, higher printing costs would be incurred by the Federal Government. Therefore, APHIS is seeking approval to not display the OMB expiration date on its forms.
18. Explain each exception to the certification statement identified in the “Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act.”
APHIS is able to certify compliance with all the provisions in the Act.
B. Collections of Information Employing Statistical Methods.
Statistical methods are not used in this information collection.
| File Type | application/msword |
| File Title | Supporting Statement |
| Author | lctoran |
| Last Modified By | kastratchko |
| File Modified | 2008-02-19 |
| File Created | 2008-02-12 |