Because of the required delay between invocations, I'd suggest a java.util.Timer or java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor. Timer is very simple, and perfectly adequate for this use case. But if additional scheduling requirements are identified later, a single Executor could handle all of them. In either case, use fixed-delay method, not a fixed-rate method.
The recurring task polls a concurrent queue for a request object. If there is a pending request, the task executes it, and returns the result via a callback. The query for the service and the callback to invoke are members of the request object.
The application keeps a reference to the shared queue. To schedule a request, simply add it to the queue.
Just to clarify, if the queue is empty when the scheduled task is executed, no request is made. The simple approach would be just to end the task, and the scheduler will invoke the task one second later to check again.
However, this means that it could take up to one second to start a task, even if no requests have been processed lately. If this unnecessary latency is intolerable, writing your own thread is probably preferable to using Timer or ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor. In your own timing loop, you have more control over the scheduling if you choose to block on an empty queue until a request is available. The built-in timers aren't guaranteed to wait a full second after the previous execution finished; they generally schedule relative to the start time of the task.
If this second case is what you have in mind, your run() method will contain a loop. Each iteration starts by blocking on the queue until a request is received, then recording the time. After processing the request, the time is checked again. If the time difference is less than one second, sleep for the the remainder. This setup assumes that the one second delay is required between the start of one request and the next. If the delay is required between the end of one request and the next, you don't need to check the time; just sleep for one second.
One more thing to note is that the service might be able to accept multiple queries in a single request, which would reduce overhead. If it does, take advantage of this by blocking on take() for the first element, then using poll(), perhaps with a very short blocking time (5 ms or so), to see if the application is making any more requests. If so, these can be bundled up in a single request to the service. If queue is a BlockingQueue<? extends Request>, it might look something like this:
Collection<Request> bundle = new ArrayList<Request>();
bundle.add(queue.take());
while (bundle.size() < BUNDLE_MAX) {
Request req = queue.poll(EXTRA, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS);
if (req == null)
break;
bundle.add(req);
}
/* Now make one service request with contents of "bundle". */