Proposed Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment Request, 23876-23877 [05-8915]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
23876
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 86 / Thursday, May 5, 2005 / Notices
FEDERAL MEDIATION AND
CONCILIATION SERVICE
Proposed Agency Information
Collection Activities; Comment
Request
Federal Mediation and
Conciliation Service.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: As required by the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Ch.
35) (PRA), the Federal Mediation and
Conciliation Service (FMCS) requests
comments on a proposed request for
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) to approve an FMCS online
customer survey. This survey is to
evaluate the impact of FMCS’
relationship-development and training
programs (RDTs), the impact of the
training program on the relationship
between labor and management, and the
impact of the training on the workplace.
The survey will be voluntary and will
be administered online, to randomly
selected private sector employers and
their corresponding unions. The survey
asks 10 questions about FMCS-provided
RDT programs. In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44
U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A), FMCS invites the
public to comment on this proposed
information collection. The FMCS will
consider all comments received in
response to this notice before requesting
approval of this collection of
information from the Office of
Management and Budget.
DATES: Submit comments on or before
July 5, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Send comments to Maria A.
Fried, Attorney-Advisor, Federal
Mediation and Conciliation Service,
2100 K Street, NW., Washington, DC
20427.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Maria A. Fried, Attorney-Advisor,
Federal Mediation and Conciliation
Service, 202–606–5444;
mfried@fmcs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Title: Survey of RelationshipDevelopment and Training Programs.
OMB Number: Not yet assigned.
Expiration Date: Not applicable.
Type of Request: New collection of
information.
Method of Collection: Historically, the
FMCS closes approximately 2400 RDT
cases per fiscal year. The intent is to
survey 10 percent of these closed cases
over the course of the fiscal year,
including company and union
counterpart that received the training.
Using its database, FMCS will randomly
select cases closed within each quarter
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:05 May 04, 2005
Jkt 205001
in order to meet the agency’s desire to
survey 10% of all closed cases over the
fiscal year.
RDT participants with e-mail
addresses will receive an e-mail with a
Web link to the survey questions. RDT
participants without e-mail addresses
will receive a post card explaining that
they have been randomly selected for a
survey and provided with a link to
access the survey. The survey will take
no longer than 5 minutes to complete.
Survey Questions:
The survey will appear online as
noted below:
FMCS Customer Survey Questions
Our records show that you recently used
FMCS training services. FMCS is collecting
this information to become more aware of the
impact of its training services and to improve
them. Participation is voluntary and
responses are completely confidential. Please
help us improve our training services by
completing this short on-line survey. There
are only 10 questions, and it should require
fewer than five minutes. Your comments are
important to us, and we appreciate your time
and your interest in FMCS training services.
Please note that the FMCS may not
conduct or sponsor, and you are not required
to respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a valid OMB control
number. The control number for this survey
is lll.
1. Which do you represent?
a. Labor.
b. Management.
2. What was the primary factor motivating
your decision to have this training
program? Select the primary factor.
a. Our recent contract negotiations were
contentious (or a recent strike) and we
believed this training would improve our
relationship and help reduce conflict.
b. We have many grievances pending and
we believed this training would help us
improve resolution of them.
c. We wanted to improve morale.
d. We need improved methods of
communication with one another.
e. We agreed to the training because the
other side wanted it.
f. An FMCS mediator recommended the
training.
g. Another source recommended training.
h. We needed to learn more effective
problem-solving techniques for our
upcoming contract negotiations.
i. Other.
3. Did the program (select one).
a. Meet expectations.
b. Exceed expectations.
c. Fall below expectations.
4. As a result of the training program, do you
believe that the parties’ relationship
improved? Select one.
a. Yes (if yes, go to question 5).
b. No (if no, go to question 6).
5. What were the positive outcomes of the
training program, if any? Please select all
that apply.
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
a. Number of grievances decreased.
b. Grievances were handled more
efficiently.
c. Employee moral improved.
d. Communication (both quality and
method) improved.
e. Productivity improved.
f. Joint problem solving techniques were
implemented or improved.
g. Contract negotiations after the training
was collaborative.
h. Absenteeism declined.
i. Mutual respect and understanding
resulted.
j. Information is shared proactively and
more frequently.
k. Support for labor-management
committees increased among senior labor
and management officials.
l. Other (describe).
m. No discernible change as a result of the
training.
n. There were some negative results of the
training (describe).
6. If you believe that the training program fell
below expectations, please indicate how
the program could be improved. (Please
describe).
7. Have you had negotiations since the
training?
a. Yes (if yes, go to question 8).
b. No (if no, go to question 9).
8. If you have had negotiations since the
training, do you believe that the training
had an impact on the negotiations? If so,
described how.
a. Yes. (Described how).
b. No.
9. Because of the FMCS training, do you
perceive that the likelihood of a job
action has (i.e., lockout or strike).
a. Increased.
b. Decreased.
c. Remained the same.
10. What is the most important reason you
might select FMCS for relationshipdevelopment training again? Select one.
a. Because of the positive impact it had on
our labor-management relations.
b. Because it made company and
employees more productive.
c. Because it helped us cope with difficult
negotiations.
d. Because it taught us important skills that
can be applied in other conflict
situations.
e. All.
f. Other.
g. Would not use FMCS for training again.
Results: Survey results will be used to
improve RDT programs, and for OMB/
Congressional submissions. Results will
be available upon request.
Estimated Annual Respondent
Burden: It is estimated that 250 labor or
management representatives will
participate in the survey. See chart
below for breakdown of annual costs.
E:\FR\FM\05MYN1.SGM
05MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 86 / Thursday, May 5, 2005 / Notices
Total annual hour burden
(for all respondents)
Union respondents 1
Management respondents 2
1250 minutes (21 hours total annually) ...
$18.07/hour × 21 hour = $379.47 ...........
$42.94/hour × 21 hours = $901.74 .........
23877
Total costs
$1281.21
1 The
average hourly wage was derived from BLS’ ‘‘Employer Costs for Employee Compensation 4th Quarter 2004,’’ from the hourly wage calculation across all occupations nationwide.
2 The average management wage rate is derived from BLS’ ‘‘General and operations managers’’ classification mean hourly wage estimates.
Request for Comments: In accordance
with the Paperwork Reduction Act,
comments on the FMCS RDT survey are
requested with regard to any of the
following:
(a) Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of functions of the Agency,
including whether the information will
have practical utility;
(b) The accuracy of the Agency’s
estimate of the burden (including hours
and costs) of the proposed collection of
information;
(c) Ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and,
(d) Ways to minimize the burden of
the collection of information on
respondents, including the use of
automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
Comments submitted in response to
this notice will be summarized and
included in the request for OMB
approval of the proposed information
collection. All comments will become a
matter of public record.
Dated: April 29, 2005.
Scot Beckenbaugh,
Acting Director.
[FR Doc. 05–8915 Filed 5–4–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6372–01–M
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
National Toxicology Program; Office of
Chemical Nomination and Selection;
Announcement of and Request for
Public Comment on Toxicological
Study Nominations to the National
Toxicology Program
National Institute of
Environmental Health Sciences,
National Institutes of Health.
ACTION: Notice; request for comments.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The National Toxicology
Program (NTP) continuously solicits
and accepts nominations for
toxicological studies to be undertaken
by the program. Nominations of
substances of potential human health
concern are received from federal
agencies, the public and other interested
parties. These nominations are subject
to several levels of review before
VerDate jul<14>2003
13:10 May 04, 2005
Jkt 205001
selections for testing are made and
toxicological studies are designed and
implemented. This notice (1) provides
brief background information and study
recommendations regarding 15
nominations for NTP study (Table 1), (2)
solicits public comment on the
nominations and study
recommendations, and (3) requests the
submission of additional relevant
information for consideration by the
NTP in its continued evaluation of these
nominations. An electronic copy of this
announcement, Internet links to
electronic versions of supporting
documents for each nomination, and
further information on the NTP and
the NTP Study Nomination and
Review Process can be accessed
through the NTP Web site (https://
ntp.niehs.nih.gov/; select ‘‘Nominations
to the Testing Program’’).
DATES: Comments or information should
be submitted by June 6, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Send comments or
information to Dr. Scott A. Masten,
Office of Chemical Nomination and
Selection, NIEHS/NTP, 111 T.W.
Alexander Drive, P.O. Box 12233,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
27709; telephone: (919) 541–5710; FAX:
(919) 541–3647; e-mail:
masten@niehs.nih.gov. Supporting
documents for these nominations are
available at the NTP Web site (https://
ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ select ‘‘Nominations
to the Testing Program’’).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: See
contact information for Dr. Masten
under ADDRESSES above.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background Information on NTP Study
Nominations and the NTP Office of
Chemical Nomination and Selection
The NTP actively seeks to identify
and select for study chemicals and other
agents for which sufficient information
is not available to adequately evaluate
potential human health hazards. The
NTP accomplishes this goal through a
formal open nomination and selection
process. Substances considered
appropriate for study generally fall into
two broad yet overlapping categories: (1)
Substances judged to have high concern
as possible public health hazards based
on the extent of human exposure and/
or suspicion of toxicity and (2)
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
substances for which toxicological data
gaps exist and additional studies would
aid in assessing potential human health
risks, e.g. by facilitating cross-species
extrapolation or evaluating doseresponse relationships. Nominations are
also solicited for studies that permit the
testing of hypotheses to enhance the
predictive ability of future NTP studies,
address mechanisms of toxicity, or fill
significant gaps in the knowledge of the
toxicity of classes of chemical,
biological, or physical substances.
Study nominations may entail the
evaluation of a variety of health-related
effects including, but not limited to,
reproductive and developmental
toxicity, genetic toxicity,
immunotoxicity, neurotoxicity,
metabolism and disposition, and
carcinogenicity in appropriate
experimental models. In reviewing and
selecting nominations for study, the
NTP also considers legislative mandates
that require responsible private sector
commercial organizations to evaluate
their products for health and
environmental effects. The possible
human health consequences of
anticipated or known human exposure,
however, remain the over-riding factor
in the NTP’s decision to study a
particular substance.
Nominations undergo a multi-step,
formal process of review. During the
entire nomination review and selection
process, the NTP works actively with
regulatory agencies, its advisors, and
interested parties to supplement
information about nominated
substances and ensure that regulatory
and public health needs are addressed.
The nomination review and selection
process is accomplished through the
participation of representatives from the
National Institute of Environmental
Health Sciences (NIEHS), other federal
agencies represented on the Interagency
Committee for Chemical Evaluation and
Coordination (ICCEC), the NTP Board of
Scientific Counselors—an external
scientific advisory body, the NTP
Executive Committee—the NTP federal
interagency policy body, and the public.
Study recommendations are initially
developed and refined by the
nominator, NTP staff, and the ICCEC.
Individual study recommendations for
the nominations listed in Table 1 may
be further refined as the formal review
E:\FR\FM\05MYN1.SGM
05MYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 86 (Thursday, May 5, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23876-23877]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-8915]
[[Page 23876]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL MEDIATION AND CONCILIATION SERVICE
Proposed Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment
Request
AGENCY: Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
Ch. 35) (PRA), the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS)
requests comments on a proposed request for Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) to approve an FMCS online customer survey. This survey is
to evaluate the impact of FMCS' relationship-development and training
programs (RDTs), the impact of the training program on the relationship
between labor and management, and the impact of the training on the
workplace. The survey will be voluntary and will be administered
online, to randomly selected private sector employers and their
corresponding unions. The survey asks 10 questions about FMCS-provided
RDT programs. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A), FMCS invites the public to comment on this
proposed information collection. The FMCS will consider all comments
received in response to this notice before requesting approval of this
collection of information from the Office of Management and Budget.
DATES: Submit comments on or before July 5, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Send comments to Maria A. Fried, Attorney-Advisor, Federal
Mediation and Conciliation Service, 2100 K Street, NW., Washington, DC
20427.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maria A. Fried, Attorney-Advisor,
Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, 202-606-5444;
mfried@fmcs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Title: Survey of Relationship-Development and Training Programs.
OMB Number: Not yet assigned.
Expiration Date: Not applicable.
Type of Request: New collection of information.
Method of Collection: Historically, the FMCS closes approximately
2400 RDT cases per fiscal year. The intent is to survey 10 percent of
these closed cases over the course of the fiscal year, including
company and union counterpart that received the training. Using its
database, FMCS will randomly select cases closed within each quarter in
order to meet the agency's desire to survey 10% of all closed cases
over the fiscal year.
RDT participants with e-mail addresses will receive an e-mail with
a Web link to the survey questions. RDT participants without e-mail
addresses will receive a post card explaining that they have been
randomly selected for a survey and provided with a link to access the
survey. The survey will take no longer than 5 minutes to complete.
Survey Questions:
The survey will appear online as noted below:
FMCS Customer Survey Questions
Our records show that you recently used FMCS training services.
FMCS is collecting this information to become more aware of the
impact of its training services and to improve them. Participation
is voluntary and responses are completely confidential. Please help
us improve our training services by completing this short on-line
survey. There are only 10 questions, and it should require fewer
than five minutes. Your comments are important to us, and we
appreciate your time and your interest in FMCS training services.
Please note that the FMCS may not conduct or sponsor, and you
are not required to respond to, a collection of information unless
it displays a valid OMB control number. The control number for this
survey is ------.
1. Which do you represent?
a. Labor.
b. Management.
2. What was the primary factor motivating your decision to have this
training program? Select the primary factor.
a. Our recent contract negotiations were contentious (or a
recent strike) and we believed this training would improve our
relationship and help reduce conflict.
b. We have many grievances pending and we believed this training
would help us improve resolution of them.
c. We wanted to improve morale.
d. We need improved methods of communication with one another.
e. We agreed to the training because the other side wanted it.
f. An FMCS mediator recommended the training.
g. Another source recommended training.
h. We needed to learn more effective problem-solving techniques
for our upcoming contract negotiations.
i. Other.
3. Did the program (select one).
a. Meet expectations.
b. Exceed expectations.
c. Fall below expectations.
4. As a result of the training program, do you believe that the
parties' relationship improved? Select one.
a. Yes (if yes, go to question 5).
b. No (if no, go to question 6).
5. What were the positive outcomes of the training program, if any?
Please select all that apply.
a. Number of grievances decreased.
b. Grievances were handled more efficiently.
c. Employee moral improved.
d. Communication (both quality and method) improved.
e. Productivity improved.
f. Joint problem solving techniques were implemented or
improved.
g. Contract negotiations after the training was collaborative.
h. Absenteeism declined.
i. Mutual respect and understanding resulted.
j. Information is shared proactively and more frequently.
k. Support for labor-management committees increased among
senior labor and management officials.
l. Other (describe).
m. No discernible change as a result of the training.
n. There were some negative results of the training (describe).
6. If you believe that the training program fell below expectations,
please indicate how the program could be improved. (Please
describe).
7. Have you had negotiations since the training?
a. Yes (if yes, go to question 8).
b. No (if no, go to question 9).
8. If you have had negotiations since the training, do you believe
that the training had an impact on the negotiations? If so,
described how.
a. Yes. (Described how).
b. No.
9. Because of the FMCS training, do you perceive that the likelihood
of a job action has (i.e., lockout or strike).
a. Increased.
b. Decreased.
c. Remained the same.
10. What is the most important reason you might select FMCS for
relationship-development training again? Select one.
a. Because of the positive impact it had on our labor-management
relations.
b. Because it made company and employees more productive.
c. Because it helped us cope with difficult negotiations.
d. Because it taught us important skills that can be applied in
other conflict situations.
e. All.
f. Other.
g. Would not use FMCS for training again.
Results: Survey results will be used to improve RDT programs, and
for OMB/Congressional submissions. Results will be available upon
request.
Estimated Annual Respondent Burden: It is estimated that 250 labor
or management representatives will participate in the survey. See chart
below for breakdown of annual costs.
[[Page 23877]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total annual hour burden (for all
respondents) Union respondents \1\ Management respondents \2\ Total costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1250 minutes (21 hours total annually).. $18.07/hour x 21 hour = $42.94/hour x 21 hours = $1281.21
$379.47. $901.74.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The average hourly wage was derived from BLS' ``Employer Costs for Employee Compensation 4th Quarter 2004,''
from the hourly wage calculation across all occupations nationwide.
\2\ The average management wage rate is derived from BLS' ``General and operations managers'' classification
mean hourly wage estimates.
Request for Comments: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction
Act, comments on the FMCS RDT survey are requested with regard to any
of the following:
(a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for
the proper performance of functions of the Agency, including whether
the information will have practical utility;
(b) The accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden (including
hours and costs) of the proposed collection of information;
(c) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and,
(d) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized
and included in the request for OMB approval of the proposed
information collection. All comments will become a matter of public
record.
Dated: April 29, 2005.
Scot Beckenbaugh,
Acting Director.
[FR Doc. 05-8915 Filed 5-4-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6372-01-M
