Supporting Statement A for 
Paperwork Reduction Act Submission

OMB Control Number 1018-XXXX

Electronic Federal Duck Stamp Pilot Program Application
FWS Form 3-2341

1.	Explain the circumstances that make the collection of information necessary.  

On March 16, 1934, President Roosevelt signed the Migratory Bird Hunting Stamp Act (16 U.S.C. 718a et seq.) popularly known as the “Duck Stamp Act,” requiring all migratory waterfowl hunters 16 years of age or older to buy a Federal migratory bird hunting and conservation stamp (Duck Stamp) annually.  Federal Duck Stamps are pictorial stamps produced by the U.S. Postal Service for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Not valid for postage, the stamps originated in 1934 as the Federal license required for all hunters over 16 years of age who wished to hunt migratory birds. The Federal Duck Stamp program has become one of the most popular and successful conservation programs ever initiated. Ninety-eight cents out of every dollar generated by the sales of Federal Duck Stamps goes directly to purchase or lease wetland habitat for protection in the National Wildlife Refuge System.  Proceeds from Duck Stamp sales have been used to purchase about 5.2 million acres of migratory waterfowl habitat on the more than 540 national wildlife refuges.

The Electronic Duck Stamp Act of 2005 (Act) (Pub.L. 109-266), passed in August 2006, requires that the Secretary of the Interior conduct a 3-year pilot program under which up to 15 States authorized by the Secretary may issue electronic Federal Duck Stamps.  We expect the electronic program to make it easier for the public to obtain required Federal Duck Stamps, thereby enhancing public participation and increasing the number of stamps sold.  Eligible applicants are State fish and wildlife agencies that have an automated licensing system authorized under State law.  There are currently 40 States that offer Internet, point of sale, or telephonic sales for their hunting and fishing licenses.  The application process will lead to the selection of up to 15 participants for this pilot program.  Under the Act, a State may not participate in the pilot program unless it submits an application and the Secretary approves it.  The Act also provides for the reporting of sales and a final evaluation report.

2.	Indicate how, by whom, how frequently, and for what purpose the information is to be used.  If the information collected will be disseminated to the public or used to support information that will be disseminated to the public, explain how the collection complies with all applicable Information Quality Guidelines.  

We will publish a notice in the Federal Register announcing the pilot program and soliciting applications for participation (see supplementary documents).  We will publish the application package on the Internet at http://www.fws.gov/duckstamps.  The application package will consist of:

•	Background of pilot program.
•	Instructions (application submission terms and conditions, sample transmittal letter, and draft Memorandum of Understanding).
•	Evaluation methodology (minimum requirements, selection of the best applicant, and selection criteria).
•	Application (FWS Form 3-2341).
•	Contact and application submission information.
•	Exhibits (data transmittal requirements, handling rates, electronic funds transfer requirements, and a copy of Pub. L. 109-266).

To participate in the pilot program eligible State fish and wildlife agencies must submit an application by June 1, 2007.  This is a one-time submission.  We will not consider any application that fails to meet the minimum qualifications.  We will use the information provided in the application to select up to 15 participants for the pilot program.  

The application (FWS Form 3-2341) asks for the following information, which follows the statutory required application process:

SELECTION FACTOR 1. The responsiveness of the applicant to the eligibility requirements of the act.  States must:

1A.	 Agree to comply with all terms and conditions in the application package.

1B. Currently sell State hunting, fishing, and other associated licenses and products through an established electronic system, including point of sale, or internet, or telephonic systems.  State must provide information verifying the current systems it uses.

1C. Issue these electronic licenses through a State automated licensing system authorized under State law.  State must provide the appropriate reference to the applicable State laws, or regulations or policies that authorize the use of these electronic systems.

1D. Agree to terms for this pilot program.  State must include a transmittal letter attesting to the State’s unconditional concurrence with the terms and conditions of the draft MOU.

1E. Provide an example and explanation of the codes the State proposes to use to create and endorse the unique identifier for the individual to whom the stamp is issued.

1F. Provide a mock up copy of the printed version of the State’s proposed electronic stamp.   State must describe the format of the electronic stamp that the State will issue under the pilot program, including identifying features of the licensee to be specified on the stamp;

1G.  Indicate that the electronic version of the actual stamp is compatible with their hunting licensing system.

SELECTION FACTOR 2: State’s responsiveness to the pilot program application requirements-narrative response.  The law states that we may NOT approve a State application unless the application contains the following information:

2A. Description of any fees the State will charge for issuance of an electronic stamp.

2B. Process the State will use to account for and transfer the amounts collected by the State to the fulfillment center as required under the program.  The contractor available for fulfillment services is Amplex Corporation.  

2C.	 Description of how and when the State will transmit the electronic stamp customer data to the fulfillment center.

2D. Description of how the actual stamps will be delivered, including the State’s choice of utilizing a consignment agreement or direct information transfer. 

2E. Copy of the policies and procedures the State will use to issue duplicate electronic stamps.  

2F.  Copy of other policies, procedures, and information that relate to this program; e.g., are there separate policies in other permit language that may influence this program?

SELECTION FACTOR 3 - Stamp Requirements.  An electronic stamp a State issues under the pilot program must have specific characteristics.  Applicants must:

3A.  Provide information to show that the Federal Duck Stamp the State issues will have the same format as any other license, validation, or privilege the State issues under the automated licensing system of the State.

3B. Demonstrate what specific identifying features of the licensee will appear on the point of sale, telephonic, or web receipt that are adequate to enable Federal, State, and other law enforcement officers to identify the holder.  Provide physical copies/examples where possible.

3C. Provide information and demonstrate how the State will communicate to the purchaser and law enforcement officials in the State that any electronic stamp issued by a State under the pilot program will, during the effective period of the electronic stamp:

	1.	bestow upon the licensee the same privileges as are bestowed by an actual stamp;
	2.	be nationally recognized as a valid Federal Duck Stamp; and
	3.	authorize the purchaser to hunt migratory waterfowl in any other State, in 	accordance with the laws of said State governing that hunting.
	
SELECTION FACTOR 4 - Guaranteed delivery of the physical stamp to the customer and improved customer service and convenience.  Applicants must:

4A. Describe what action the State will take to guarantee timely information transfer to the fulfillment center which will allow them to meet the time constraints in filling the order.

4B. Outline how the State’s plan to resolve customer complaints regarding late or incorrect orders, or missing stamp deliveries.

SELECTION FACTOR 5 – State’s agreement to the terms and conditions outlined in the Memorandum of Understanding governing the pilot program.  States must indicate if they:

5A.  Agree to comply with all of the terms and conditions specified in the Memorandum of Understanding, including its exhibits.

5B. Agree to operate at the current Service approved handling rates during the term of the pilot until such time as a new handling rate schedule is approved justifying cost recovery. (A selected State may request a handling rate increase at any time after selection.)

5C. If the State wishes to operate its own fulfillment operations, agree to accept the operating terms of the optional fulfillment opportunity as outlined in the application package.

5D. Agree to implement an equal opportunity program and comply with the terms of the equal opportunity and handicapped access requirements of the Memorandum of Understanding.

5E. Agree to meet the public liability and property insurance requirements of the Memorandum of Understanding.

5F. Agree to the use of Electronic Funds Transfer in transmitting funds to the State selected fulfillment center.

SELECTION FACTOR 6 – Experience and financial capability. Narrative/Statistical –
Congress has not appropriated funds to the Service to support this pilot program.  The selected States understand, and concur that there will be no funding provided by the Service to either launch or manage this program.

The Service believes that past experience provides a reasonable indication of how we may expect the electronic Duck Stamp sales to perform.   Please provide example(s) of your State’s experience in the operation and management of electronic licensing systems including any information you might have on customer satisfaction.  Also, please provide information on the number of transactions for each individual system (web, phone or point-of-sale) for the years the system has been in operation, up to 6 years.  This will assist us in determining a base line and measure for future performance with this method of sales.

6A. Contact information, including, name, mailing and FedEx address, phone, fax, cell, and e-mail, for personnel who will be involved in the State’s management and operation of the system; e.g., 	Information Technology Contact, Financial Contact, Project Management Contact, Stamp/Licensing Program Contact, etc.

6B.	 Demonstrate that State organization and supporting partners have a history of meeting financial obligations.

6C. Demonstrate an understanding of the financial obligations of the pilot program.

6D. Clear description of any handling fee to be assessed to cover costs or other forms of overhead. 

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 [and specifically how this collection meets GPEA requirements.].

We continually strive to enhance the ability of individuals and entities to conduct business with us electronically. Therefore, we are taking steps to adopt the Internet as our chief means of conducting duck stamp transactions in order to improve services to our customers and to simplify and expedite our business processes.  The application package will be available on the Internet, and we are requesting that States submit their applications electronically via email.  

4.	Describe efforts to identify duplication.  

The Act requires the information that we plan to collect, and the information is not available elsewhere.

5.	If the collection of information impacts small businesses or other small entities, describe the methods used to minimize burden.

The collection does not impact small entities.  Only States can apply to participate in the pilot program.

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.

If we do not collect this information, we will not be able to implement the pilot program and meet the requirements of Pub. L. 109-266.  

7.	Explain any special circumstances that would cause an 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 contract, grant-in-aid, or tax records, for more than three 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;
	*	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 statute 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 secrets, 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.

No special circumstances exist that would cause us to collect this information in a manner inconsistent with OMB guidelines.

8.	Provide 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 prior to submission to OMB.  Summarize public comments received in response to that notice (or in response to a PRA statement) and describe actions taken by the agency in response to these comments.  

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.  [Please list the names, titles, addresses, and phone numbers of persons contacted.]

We are requesting emergency approval for this information collection so that we can meet the requirements of the Act, which was passed in August 2006.  The Act requires that:

•	States must submit an application to participate and the Secretary must approve it.
•	The pilot program begin on September 1, 2007.  
•	We publish a notice 30 days prior to accepting applications providing:  (1) deadlines for submission of applications, (2) eligibility requirements for participation, and (3) criteria for selection.  

Since we must notify accepted States no later than July 1, 2007, so they can make and test system modifications, we need to receive applications no later than June 1.  If OMB approves this emergency request for the application, we will immediately begin the process to obtain regular approval for the reporting requirements contained in the Act.

Upon passage of the Act, we formed a workgroup consisting of members of the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, Information Technology Subcommittee, the fulfillment contractor, and the Service.  The workgroup determined the process and evaluation criteria for the application.  Edits to the application were completed through the workgroup. The initial meeting of the workgroup was September 19, 2006, with a final meeting on March 23, 2007.  Between the meetings, the group conferred by conference call on a monthly basis.  The application and procedures just completed legal review within the Department of the Interior.  In addition to members of the Service and the contractor, the members of the workgroup were:

Steve Barton, Treasurer
Western Assoc. of Fish and Wildlife Agencies
P.O. Box 140555
Boise, ID 83714-0555
208-938-1036	Henrietta Turner, License Admin. Manager
Colorado Division of Wildlife
6060 Broadway
Denver, CO  80216
303-291-7379	
Kim Dudish, Manager, License Unit
Texas Parks and Wildlife Department
4200 Smith School Road 
Austin, TX 78744
512-389-4675	Alice R. Browning, Asst Chief, Fiscal Division
AR Game & Fish Commission
2 Natural Resources Dr.
Little Rock, AR 72205
501-223-6343	
Tammy Wright, Amplex Corporation
1100 Fountain Parkway
Grand Prairie, TX 75050
800-852-4897		

9.	Explain any decision to provide any payment or gift to respondents, other than remuneration of contractors or grantees.

We do not provide payments or gifts to respondents.

10.	Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents and the basis for the assurance in statute, regulation, or agency policy.

We do not release any personal information from agencies or the public.  The confidentiality of this information is protected by the Privacy Act of 1974.

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.  

We do not ask questions of a sensitive nature. 

12.	Provide estimates of the hour burden of the collection of information.  

Currently 40 States offer Internet, point of sale, or telephonic sales for their hunting and fishing licenses, which makes them eligible to participate in our electronic Federal Duck Stamp pilot program.  

We expect no more than 30 States to submit an application to participate.  The application is a one-time submission at the beginning of the program.   We estimate the average time to complete an application to be 40 hours, for a total burden of 1,200 hours.  However, this time could vary substantially depending on the complexity of an agency’s licensing program.  We estimate the dollar value of the 1,200 total burden hours to be $48,000, based on $40 per hour for salary/benefits.

13.	Provide an estimate of the total annual [nonhour] cost burden to respondents or recordkeepers resulting from the collection of information.  

There is no nonhour cost burden.  The State agencies currently collect the information required by the Act.  State agencies would have the same costs for their own programs, even if the Service did not implement the pilot program.  However, if States do incur costs in issuing electronic stamps under the pilot program, the Act does allow the State to charge a reasonable fee to recover such costs.  If the State does propose to charge a fee, it must provide details under Section 6 of the application.

14.	Provide estimates of annualized costs to the Federal Government.  

We estimate the total annual cost to the Federal Government to be $15,000, based on an average of $50 for salary and benefits.  We estimate it will take approximately 300 hours to review applications and prepare necessary documents for participants.

15.	Explain the reasons for any program changes or adjustments.

This is a new collection as a result of the enactment of Pub. L. 109-266.

16.	For collections of information whose results will be published, outline plans for tabulation and publication.  

Results of this collection will not be published.  We do not release any personal information from agencies or individuals to any agency or the public.  

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.

We will display the OMB control number and expiration date.

18.	Explain each exception to the certification statement identified in Item 19, "Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions," of OMB Form 83-I.

There are no exceptions to the certification statement.