SuptStmt (Retain Assessment) 04 25 18

2018 SUPPORTING STATEMENT
for
BEEF RESEARCH AND PROMOTION: PRODUCER REQUEST FOR STATE TO
RETAIN CHECKOFF ASSESSMENT FORM
OMB NO. 0581-0302
NOTE TO REVIEWER: Upon approval of this collection, the Agricultural Marketing Service
(AMS) will submit a Justification Request to merge this collection into the currently approved
OMB No. 0581-0093, National Research, Promotion, and Consumer Information Programs.
A. Justification.
1.

EXPLAIN THE CIRCUMSTANCES THAT MAKE THE COLLECTION
OF INFORMATION NECESSARY. IDENTIFY ANY LEGAL OR
ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS THAT NECESSITATE THE
COLLECTION.
Congress has delegated to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) the
responsibility for implementing and overseeing the Beef Research and Promotion
Program. The enabling legislation for the Beef Research and Promotion Program
is the Beef Promotion and Research Act of 1985 (Act) (7 U.S.C. 2901-2911).
On May 2, 2016, a national cattle organization representing beef producers
(Plaintiffs) filed a complaint in the District Court for the District of Montana
Great Falls Division, against Sonny Perdue, Secretary of Agriculture for USDA,
seeking declaratory and injunctive relief. The Plaintiffs alleged that the current
administration of the Beef Checkoff Program in Montana violates the First
Amendment of the United States Constitution by allowing the Montana Beef
Council (MBC)—the beef council that collects assessments in Montana—to use a
portion of cattle producers’ assessments paid to the Beef Checkoff Program to
fund promotional campaigns by MBC without first obtaining permission from
those producers.
On June 21, 2017, a U.S. District Court Judge in Montana issued a preliminary
injunction enjoining USDA from continuing to allow MBC to use the assessments
that it is qualified to collect under the Beef Checkoff Program to fund advertising
campaigns, unless a cattle producer provides prior affirmative consent authorizing
MBC to retain a portion of the cattle producer’s assessment. As a result of this
preliminary injunction, MBC must begin forwarding all Beef Checkoff Program
funds directly to the Cattlemen’s Beef Promotion and Research Board (Beef
Board), the entity that administers the National Beef Checkoff Program, absent
proof that a producer has provided advance affirmative consent authorizing MBC
to retain a portion of that producer’s assessment.

1

Without the producer’s permission for the State to retain a portion of the Federal
assessment under the Beef Checkoff Program, MBC will likely have insufficient
funds to pay for ongoing projects, contracts, staff salaries, and other
administrative functions and, therefore, could be forced to cease operations and
potentially leave current staff unemployed.
The Beef Checkoff Program carries out projects relating to research, consumer
information, advertising, sales promotion, producer information, market
development, and product research to assist, improve, or promote the marketing,
distribution, and utilization of beef. The Beef Checkoff Program is directed by a
national industry board whose members are appointed by the Secretary of
Agriculture, who also approves the Beef Boards’ budgets, plans, and projects.
The latter responsibility has been delegated to AMS. The funding for the Beef
Checkoff Program is industry-specific, with assessments generated by producers
and importers each time cattle are sold. AMS’s objective in carrying out its
responsibility is to assure the following: (1) assessment funds are collected and
properly accounted for; (2) expenditures of funds are for the purposes authorized
by the enabling legislation; and (3) the Beef Board’s administration of the
program conforms to legislation and USDA policy. AMS’s Livestock, Poultry,
and Seed Program has direct oversight of the Beef Research and Promotion
Program. State beef councils collect national assessments, retain a portion, and
remit at least half to the national programs. To carry out its responsibilities, this
program requires the use of forms covered under OMB No. 0581-0093. However,
to provide producers in Montana (and any other State subject to a similar court
order) with the opportunity for the State beef council to retain a portion of the
Federal assessment in the State in which assessments were collected, the form
described in item 2 below is required.
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.
The Beef Promotion and Research Order (Order) and regulations governing the
Beef Research and Promotion Program authorize the Qualified State Beef
Councils (QSBCs) to collect and submit certain information as required. The
information will be used by some beef producers in Montana (and any other State
subject to a similar court order) who seek to have a portion of the Federal
assessments remain with MBC (and any other State subject to a similar court
order) instead of the full assessment collected being forwarded to the Beef Board.
QSBCs administer the State beef program.

2

AMS developed the LPS-2 Producer Request to Retain Beef Checkoff
Assessments form so that producers have an option to allow MBC (and any other
State subject to a similar court order) to retain a portion of the assessment
collected instead of forwarding the full assessment collected to the Beef Board.
The LPS-2 form gives the producer the option to (1) submit the form once a year
or (2) submit the form each time cattle are sold.
Without the producer’s permission for the State to retain a portion of the Federal
assessment under the Beef Checkoff Program, MBC will likely have insufficient
funds to pay for ongoing projects, contracts, staff salaries, and other
administrative functions and, therefore, could be forced to cease operations and
potentially leave current staff unemployed.
Six comments were received on the 60-day Notice published in the Federal
Register on September 22, 2017, Vol. 82, No. 183, page 44376. These
commenters suggested changes to the LPS-2 Producer Request to Retain Beef
Checkoff Assessments form developed to carry out the court order that authorized
producers to retain a portion of the Federal Assessment with QSBC rather than
remit the full Federal assessment to the Beef Board. AMS has reviewed and
accepted the changes the commenters have requested. The changes to the form
include (1) rearrange the form for easier flow of information, (2) having producer
complete the LPS-2 only once a year, and (3) deleted duplicate information in the
form.
LPS-2 PRODUCER REQUEST TO RETAIN BEEF CHECKOFF
ASSESSMENT FORM
The purpose of the form will be used by some beef producers in Montana (and
any other State subject to a similar court order) who request that a portion of their
required Federal assessment be retained by the QSBC.
3.

DESCRIBE WHETHER, AND TO WHAT EXTENT, THE COLLECTION
OF INFORMATION INVOLVES THE USE OF AUTOMATED,
ELECTRONIC, MECHANICAL, OR OTHER TECHNOLOGICAL
COLLECTION TECHNIQUES 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.
Upon approval, the form will become part of the AMS Integrated e-Government
Report. As with other research and promotion forms, LPS-2 will be submitted
directly to the Beef Board. The Beef Board is not part of a Federal agency, but is
3

an industry commodity board that operates under Federal authority and oversight.
Therefore, the provision of an electronic submission alternative is not required by
the Government Paperwork Elimination Act. In addition, it is determined that
LPS-2 will not be made available for electronic submission due to logistical
constraints of having funds moved from a State organization to the national
program. The form will be made available in a .pdf fillable format located on
AMS’s and the Beef Board’s websites, allowing users to fill in and print off a
copy to submit by fax or mail to the appropriate QSBC or Beef Board. A hard
copy version is also available through QSBCs or Beef Board for users without
Internet access.
4.

DESCRIBE EFFORTS TO IDENTIFY DUPLICATION. SHOW
SPECIFICALLY WHY ANY SIMILAR INFORMATION ALREADY
AVAILABLE CANNOT BE USED OR MODIFIED FOR USE FOR THE
PURPOSE(S) DESCRIBED IN ITEM 2 ABOVE.
The required information is not available from any other source because it relates
specifically to producers of cattle to voluntarily use the “LPS-2 Producer Request
to Retain Checkoff Assessment” form to request, under certain circumstances, that
a portion of their Federal assessment be retained with a QSBC authorized under
their respective statutes, rather than the full Federal assessment being remitted to
the national program.

5.

IF THE COLLECTION OF INFORMATION IMPACTS SMALL
BUSINESSES OR OTHER SMALL ENTITIES (ITEM 5 OF THE OMB
FORM 83-I), DESCRIBE THE METHODS USED TO MINIMIZE
BURDEN.
According to 13 CFR 121.201, the Small Business Administration defines small
agricultural producers as those having annual receipts of less than $750,000.
Under these definitions, the majority of beef producers that would be affected are
considered small entities. We have estimated the number of respondents for this
collection to be 100, and we estimate that 100 are considered small businesses.
The information collection requirements contained in this submission are
voluntary. Beef producers would only complete the form if they sell beef or beef
products in Montana (or another State subject to a similar court order) and if they
chose to seek flexibility in whether a portion of their Federal assessments be
retained with a QSBC. The form requires only a minimal amount of information,
which can be supplied without data processing equipment or outside technical
expertise. The data used to complete these form is routine in all business
transactions.

4

6.

DESCRIBE THE CONSEQUENCE 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.
The revised form would be completed voluntarily by beef producers in Montana
(and any other State subject to a similar court order that is authorized to collect
assessments under the Act). The form, once completed by beef producers, will
provide prior affirmative consent authorizing certain State beef councils to retain
a portion of the Federal assessment paid by beef producers. Otherwise the full
assessment for the Montana Beef Checkoff Program (and any other State subject
to a similar court order) will be forwarded to the Beef Board.
By law, all cattle producers, except organic beef producers, must pay an
assessment. QSBCs are legally responsible for collecting monthly assessments
and remitting a portion to the Beef Board. Because the court order requires MBC
to immediately begin remitting the full $1-per-head assessment to the Beef Board,
MBC must be able to provide beef producers a mechanism (e.g., form) to retain a
portion of the Federal assessment in the State.

7.

EXPLAIN ANY SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES THAT WOULD CAUSE
ANY INFORMATION COLLECTION TO BE CONDUCTED IN A
MANNER:
-

REQUIRING RESPONDENTS TO REPORT INFORMATION TO
THE AGENCY MORE OFTEN THAN QUARTERLY;

-

REQUIRING RESPONDENTS TO PREPARE A WRITTEN
RESPONSE TO A COLLECTION OF INFORMATION IN FEWER
THAN 30 DAYS AFTER RECEIPT OF IT;

-

REQUIRING RESPONDENTS TO SUBMIT MORE THAN AN
ORIGINAL AND TWO COPIES OF ANY DOCUMENT;

-

REQUIRING RESPONDENTS TO RETAIN RECORDS, OTHER
THAN HEALTH, MEDICAL, GOVERNMENT
CONTRACTGRANT-IN-AID, OR TAX RECORDS FOR MORE
THAN 3 YEARS;

-

IN CONNECTION WITH A STATISTICAL SURVEY, THAT IS
NOT DESIGNED TO PRODUCE VALID AND RELIABLE
RESULTS THAT CAN BE GENERALIZED TO THE UNIVERSE
OF STUDY;
5

-

REQUIRING THE USE OF A STATISTICAL DATA
CLASSIFICATION THAT HAS NOT BEEN REVIEWED AND
APPROVED BY OMB;

-

THAT INCLUDES A PLEDGE OF CONFIDENTIALITY THAT IS
NOT SUPPORTED BY AUTHORITY ESTABLISHED IN STATUE
OR REGULATION, THAT IS NOT SUPPORTED BY
DISCLOSURE AND DATA SECURITY POLICIES THAT ARE
CONSISTENT WITH THE PLEDGE, OR WHICH
UNNECESSARILY IMPEDES SHARING OF DATA WITH OTHER
AGENCIES FOR COMPATIBLE CONFIDENTIAL USE; OR

-

REQUIRING RESPONDENTS TO SUBMIT PROPRIETARY
TRADE SECRET, OR OTHER CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
UNLESS THE AGENCY CAN DEMONSTRATE THAT IT HAS
INSTITUTED PROCEDURES TO PROTECT THE
INFORMATION'S CONFIDENTIALITY TO THE EXTENT
PERMITTED BY LAW.
There are no such special circumstances. The collection of information is
conducted in a manner consistent with the guidelines in 5 CFR 1320.

8.

IF APPLICABLE, PROVIDE A COPY AND IDENTIFY THE DATE AND
PAGE NUMBER OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER OF
THE AGENCY'S NOTICE, REQUIRED BY 5 CFR 1320.8(d),
SOLICITING COMMENTS ON THE INFORMATION COLLECTION
COMMENTS RECEIVED IN RESPONSE TO THAT NOTICE AND
DESCRIBE ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE AGENCY IN RESPONSE TO
THESE COMMENTS. SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS COMMENTS
RECEIVED ON COST AND HOUR BURDEN.
The notice “Request for Approval of a New Information Collection for Beef
Producers to Request for State to Retain a Portion of Assessments was published
on September 22, 2017, Vol. 82, No. 183, page number 44376. AMS received
10 comments, 4 of the comments had no relevance to the notice and 6 of the
comments were form letters with the same information.
Six commenters suggested changes to the LPS-2 Producer Request to Retain Beef
Checkoff Assessments form developed to carry out the court order that authorized
producers to retain a portion of the Federal Assessment with QSBC rather than
remit the full Federal assessment to the Beef Board. AMS has reviewed and
accepted the changes the commenters have requested. The changes to the form

6

include (1) rearrange the form for easier flow of information, (2) having producer
complete the LPS-2 only once a year, and (3) deleted duplicate information in the
form
-

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
FORMAT (IF ANY), AND ON THE DATA ELEMENTS TO
BE RECORDED, DISCLOSED, OR REPORTED.

AMS published a 60-day notice on September 22, 2017.
-

CONSULTATION WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF THOSE
FROM WHOM INFORMATION IS TO BE OBTAINED OR
THOSE WHO MUST COMPILE RECORDS SHOULD
OCCUR AT LEAST ONCE EVERY 3 YEARS -- EVEN IF
THE COLLECTION OF INFORMATION ACTIVITY IS
THE SAME AS IN PRIOR PERIODS. THERE MAY BE
CIRCUMSTANCES THAT MAY PRECLUDE
CONSULTATION IN A SPECIFIC SITUATION. THESE
CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD BE EXPLAINED.

There are no obstacles to consulting with industry members who must submit
information to the Beef Board. AMS has consulted with staff from the Beef
Board on this new collection: Cattlemen’s Beef Promotion and Research Board;
9000 East Nichols Avenue, Suite 215; Centennial, Colorado 80112; (303) 2209890.
9.

EXPLAIN ANY DECISION TO PROVIDE ANY PAYMENT OR GIFT TO
RESPONDENTS, OTHER THAN REMUNERATION OF CONTRACTORS
OR GRANTEES.
No payments or gifts are provided to respondents.

10.

DESCRIBE ANY ASSURANCE OF CONFIDENTIALITY PROVIDED TO
RESPONDENTS AND THE BASIS FOR THE ASSURANCE IN STATUTE,
REGULATION, OR AGENCY POLICY.
To assist the Beef Board and the Secretary in the collection of proper information,
the Order provides that producers and QSBCs shall maintain and make available
for inspection by the Secretary and the Beef Board such books and records
prescribed by the Order. The Order provides specifically that all information
7

obtained from those books and records or from reports filed under the Order shall
be kept confidential by those having the information. In addition, the Order
provides for fines, imprisonment, and removal from office for employees of
USDA or the Beef Board convicted of violating the confidentiality provisions of
the Order as directed by 7 CFR 1260.620 and 7 CFR 1220.624. The Act
governing the program provide that information acquired from respondents will
be kept confidential. Reports submitted to the Beef Board or in some cases
another party designated by the Beef Board are accessible only by appropriate
Beef Board (or designated party) staff and certain USDA employees, most of
whom are in Washington, DC. Industry members of the Beef Board do not have
access to any party’s reports or assessment records. The Beef Board (or
designated party) staff, as well as USDA staff, are aware of the penalties for
violating confidentiality requirements, which could include a fine, imprisonment,
and removal from office.
11.

PROVIDE ADDITIONAL JUSTIFICATION FOR ANY QUESTIONS OF A
SENSITIVE NATURE, SUCH AS SEXUAL BEHAVIOR AND
ATTITUDES, RELIGIOUS BELIEFS, AND OTHER MATTERS THAT
ARE COMMONLY 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.
No questions of a sensitive nature are included on these forms.

12.

PROVIDE ESTIMATES OF THE HOUR BURDEN OF THE
COLLECTION OF INFORMATION.
THE STATEMENT SHOULD:
INDICATE THE NUMBER OF RESPONDENTS, FREQUENCY OF
RESPONSE, ANNUAL HOUR BURDEN, AND AN EXPLANATION
OF HOW THE BURDEN WAS ESTIMATED. UNLESS DIRECTED
TO DO SO, AGENCIES SHOULD NOT CONDUCT SPECIAL
SURVEYS TO OBTAIN INFORMATION ON WHICH TO BASE
HOUR BURDEN ESTIMATES. CONSULTATION WITH A
SAMPLE (FEWER THAN 10) OF POTENTIAL RESPONDENTS IS
DESIRABLE. IF THE HOUR BURDEN ON RESPONDENTS IS
EXPECTED TO VARY WIDELY BECAUSE OF DIFFERENCE IN
ACTIVITY, SIZE, OR COMPLEXITY, SHOW THE RANGE OF
ESTIMATED HOUR BURDEN, AND EXPLAIN THE REASONS

8

FOR THE VARIANCE. GENERALLY, ESTIMATES SHOULD
NOT INCLUDE BURDEN HOURS FOR CUSTOMARY AND
USUAL BUSINESS PRACTICES.
The Agency estimates that there would be 100 respondents with
1 response for a total of 8.30 burden hours. Estimates of the burden
and recordkeeping for this collection of information are summarized on
the AMS-71 spreadsheet under Supplementary documents.
-

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.

-

PROVIDE ESTIMATES OF ANNUALIZED COST TO
RESPONDENTS FOR THE HOUR BURDENS FOR
COLLECTIONS OF INFORMATION, IDENTIFYING AND USING
APPROPRIATE WAGE RATE CATEGORIES.
The estimated annual cost of providing the information to the Board by the
total estimated number of persons subject to information collection burden
(100 persons and 8.30 burden hours) would be $194.80. This total has
been estimated by multiplying 8.30 (total burden hours) by $23.47, the
hourly earnings of first-line supervisors of farming, fishing, and forestry
workers as obtained from the U.S. Department of Labor Statistics’
National Compensation Survey: Occupational Employment and Wages,
May 2016 (NCS Occupational Wages). This publication can also be found
at the following website:
https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes451011.htm.

13. PROVIDE AN ESTIMATE 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 ESTIMATE 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. THE
ESTIMATES SHOULD TAKE INTO ACCOUNT COSTS
ASSOCIATED WITH GENERATING, MAINTAINING, AND
DISCLOSING OR PROVIDING THE INFORMATION. INCLUDE
9

DESCRIPTIONS OF METHODS USED TO ESTIMATE MAJOR
COST FACTORS INCLUDING SYSTEM AND TECHNOLOGY
ACQUISITION, EXPECTED USEFUL LIFE OF CAPITAL
EQUIPMENT, THE DISCOUNT RATE(S), AND THE TIME
PERIOD OVER WHICH COSTS WILL BE INCURRED. CAPITAL
AND START-UP COSTS INCLUDE, AMONG OTHER ITEMS,
PREPARATIONS FOR COLLECTING INFORMATION SUCH AS
PURCHASING COMPUTERS AND SOFTWARE; MONITORING,
SAMPLING, DRILLING AND TESTING EQUIPMENT; AND
RECORD STORAGE FACILITIES.
-

IF COST ESTIMATES ARE EXPECTED TO VARY WIDELY,
AGENCIES SHOULD PRESENT RANGES OF COST BURDENS
AND EXPLAIN THE REASONS FOR THE VARIANCE. THE
COST OF PURCHASING OR CONTRACTING OUT
INFORMATION COLLECTION SERVICES SHOULD BE A PART
OF THIS COST BURDEN ESTIMATE. IN DEVELOPING COST
BURDEN ESTIMATES, AGENCIES MAY CONSULT WITH A
SAMPLE OF RESPONDENTS (FEWER THAN 10), UTILIZE THE
60-DAY PRE-OMB SUBMISSION PUBLIC COMMENT PROCESS
AND USE EXISTING ECONOMIC OR REGULATORY IMPACT
ANALYSIS ASSOCIATED WITH THE RULEMAKING
CONTAINING THE INFORMATION COLLECTION, AS
APPROPRIATE.

-

GENERALLY, ESTIMATES SHOULD NOT INCLUDE
PURCHASES OF EQUIPMENT OR SERVICES, OR PORTIONS
THEREOF, MADE: (1) PRIOR TO OCTOBER 1, 1995, (2) TO
ACHIEVE REGULATORY COMPLIANCE WITH
REQUIREMENTS NOT ASSOCIATED WITH THE
INFORMATION COLLECTION, (3) FOR REASONS OTHER
THAN TO PROVIDE INFORMATION OR KEEPING RECORDS
FOR THE GOVERNMENT, OR (4) AS PART OF CUSTOMARY
AND USUAL BUSINESS OR PRIVATE PRACTICES.
There are no capital, startup, operation, or maintenance costs associated
with this program.

14.

PROVIDE ESTIMATES OF ANNUALIZED COST TO THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT. ALSO, PROVIDE A DESCRIPTION OF THE METHOD
USED TO ESTIMATE COST, WHICH SHOULD INCLUDE
QUANTIFICATION OF HOURS, OPERATION EXPENSES (SUCH AS
EQUIPMENT, OVERHEAD, PRINTING, AND SUPPORT STAFF), AND
ANY OTHER EXPENSE THAT WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN INCURRED
10

WITHOUT THIS COLLECTION OF INFORMATION. AGENCIES ALSO
MAY AGGREGATE COST ESTIMATES FROM ITEMS 12, 13, AND 14 IN
A SINGLE TABLE.
There are no additional costs associated with this information collection. The
Beef Board or a party designated by the Beef Board will process the form using
assessment funds. By law, the Federal government does not bear any cost for
overseeing the research and promotion programs. All costs to the government are
reimbursed by the Beef Board.
15.

EXPLAIN THE REASON FOR ANY PROGRAM CHANGES OR
ADJUSTMENTS REPORTED IN ITEMS 13 OR 14 OF THE OMB FORM
83-I.
This is an extension collection and will eventually be merged into the information
collection approved under 0581-0093. The burden results from the creation of a
form that will provide certain beef producers in Montana (or another State subject
to a similar court order) with additional flexibility about whether a portion of the
Federal assessment collected remains with QSBCs, or the full amount forwarded
to the national board. (See AMS-71 under Supplementary documents.)

16.

FOR COLLECTIONS OF INFORMATION WHOSE RESULTS WILL BE
PUBLISHED, OUTLINE PLANS FOR TABULATION, AND
PUBLICATION. ADDRESS ANY COMPLEX ANALYTICAL
TECHNIQUES THAT WILL BE USED. PROVIDE THE TIME
SCHEDULE FOR THE ENTIRE PROJECT, INCLUDING BEGINNING
AND ENDING DATES OF THE COLLECTION OF INFORMATION,
COMPLETION OF REPORT, PUBLICATION DATES, AND OTHER
ACTIONS.
Periodically, AMS or the Beef Board may be asked for information concerning the
amount of assessments that have been retained for State programs. Any of the
data obtained from this information collection would be published in the
aggregate so as not to identify an individual entity. Using totals, as opposed to
individual information, is common practice for reporting industry statistics. For
example, USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service uses similar policies.
There are no complex analytical techniques that would be applied to this data.

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.
AMS has no objection to displaying the expiration date on this form.
11

18.

EXPLAIN EACH EXCEPTION TO THE CERTIFICATION STATEMENT
IDENTIFIED IN ITEM 19, "CERTIFICATION FOR PAPERWORK
REDUCTION ACT SUBMISSIONS," OF OMB FORM 83-I.
The agency is able to certify compliance with all provisions under Item 19 of
OMB Form 83-I.

B.

COLLECTIONS OF INFORMATION EMPLOYING STATISTICAL METHODS

-

THE AGENCY SHOULD BE PREPARED TO JUSTIFY ITS DECISION NOT TO
USE STATISTICAL METHODS IN ANY CASE WHERE SUCH METHODS
MIGHT REDUCE BURDEN OR IMPROVE ACCURACY OF RESULTS. WHEN
ITEM 17 ON THE FORM 83-I IS CHECKED “YES”, THE FOLLOWING
DOCUMENTATION SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE SUPPORTING
STATEMENT TO THE EXTENT THAT IT APPLIES TO THE METHODS
PROPOSED.
This information collection does not employ statistical methods.

12