Proposed Data Collections Submitted for Public Comment and Recommendations, 43138-43139 [E9-20578]

Download as PDF jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 43138 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 164 / Wednesday, August 26, 2009 / Notices Journal of Cereal Science 47(2): 118–133, 2008. 37. Friedman, M., and C.E. Levin, ‘‘Review of methods for the reduction of dietary content and toxicity of acrylamide,’’ Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 56(15): 6113–40, 2008. 38. Foot, R.J., N.U. Haase, K. Grob, and P. ´ Gonde, ‘‘Acrylamide in fried and roasted potato products: a review on progress in mitigation,’’ Food Additives and Contaminants 24(Suppl 1): 37–46, 2007. 39. Guenther, H., E. Anklam, T. Wenzl, and R.H. Stadler, ‘‘Acrylamide in coffee: review of progress in analysis, formation and level reduction,’’ Food Additives and Contaminants 24(Suppl 1): 60–70, 2007. 40. Halford, N.G., N. Muttucumaru, T.Y. Curtis, and M.A. Parry, ‘‘Genetic and agronomic approaches to decreasing acrylamide precursors in crop plants,’’ Food Additives and Contaminants 24(Suppl 1): 26–36, 2007. 41. Konings, E.J., P. Ashby, C.G. Hamlet, and G.A. Thompson, ‘‘Acrylamide in cereal and cereal products: a review on progress in level reduction,’’ Food Additives and Contaminants 24(Suppl 1): 47–59, 2007. 42. Morales, F., E. Capuano, and V. Fogliano, ‘‘Mitigation strategies to reduce acrylamide formation in fried potato products,’’ Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1126: 89–100, 2008. 43. Muttucumaru, N., J.S. Elmore, T. Curtis, D.S. Mottram, M.A. Parry, and N.G. Halford, ‘‘Reducing acrylamide precursors in raw materials derived from wheat and potato,’’ Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 56(15): 6167–72, 2008. 44. Stadler, R.H., ‘‘Acrylamide formation in different foods and potential strategies for reduction,’’ Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology 561: 157–169, 2005. 45. Stadler, R.H., and G. Scholz, ‘‘Acrylamide: an update on current knowledge in analysis, levels in food, mechanisms of formation, and potential strategies of control,’’ Nutrition Reviews 62(12): 449–67, 2004. 46. Taeymans, D., A. Andersson, P. Ashby, ´ I. Blank, P. Gonde, P. van Eijck, V. Faivre, S.P. Lalljie, H. Lingnert, M. Lindblom, R. ¨ Matissek, D. Muller, R.H. Stadler, A. Studer, D. Silvani, D. Tallmadge, G. Thompson, T. Whitmore, J. Wood, and D. Zyzak. ‘‘Acrylamide: update on selected research activities conducted by the European food and drink industry,’’ Journal of AOAC International 88(1): 234–41, 2005. 47. Taeymans, D., J. Wood, P. Ashby, I. ´ Blank, A. Studer, R.H. Stadler, P. Gonde, P. Van Eijck, S. Lalljie, H. Lingnert, M. ¨ Lindblom, R. Matissek, D. Muller, D. Tallmadge, J. O’Brien, S. Thompson, D. Silvani, and T. Whitmore, ‘‘A review of acrylamide: an industry perspective on research, analysis, formation, and control,’’ Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition 44(5): 323–47, 2004. 48. Zhang, Y., and Y. Zhang, ‘‘Formation and reduction of acrylamide in Maillard reaction: a review based on the current state of knowledge,’’ Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition 47(5): 521–542, 2007. 49. Confederation of Food and Drink Industries of the EU (CIAA), ‘‘The CIAA VerDate Nov<24>2008 17:05 Aug 25, 2009 Jkt 217001 Acrylamide ‘Toolbox’, Revision 12,’’ 2009. Accessed online at https://www.ciaa.be/ documents/brochures/ ac_toolbox_20090216.pdf. 50. CIAA, ‘‘A ‘Toolbox’ for the Reduction of Acrylamide in Biscuits, Crackers & Crispbreads,’’ 2007. Accessed online at https://www.ciaa.be/documents/others/ biscuits-EN-final.pdf. 51. CIAA, ‘‘A ‘Toolbox’ for the Reduction of Acrylamide in Bread Products,’’ 2007. Accessed online at https://www.ciaa.be/ documents/others/bread-EN-final.pdf. 52. CIAA, ‘‘A ‘Toolbox’ for the Reduction of Acrylamide in Breakfast Cereals,’’ 2007. Accessed online at https://www.ciaa.be/ documents/others/cereals-EN-final.pdf. 53. CIAA, ‘‘A ‘Toolbox’ for the Reduction of Acrylamide in Fried Potato Products Potato Crisps,’’ 2007. Accessed online at https://www.ciaa.be/documents/others/crispsEN-final.pdf. 54. CIAA, ‘‘A ‘Toolbox’ for the Reduction of Acrylamide in Fried Potato Products/ French Fries,’’ 2007. Accessed online at https://www.ciaa.be/documents/others/ french%20fries-EN-final.pdf. 55. Association of the Chocolate, Biscuits, and Confectionery Industries of the EU (CAOBISCO), CAOBISCO Review of Acrylamide Mitigation in Biscuits, Crackers and Crispbread, 2006. Accessed online at https://www.caobisco.com/doc_uploads/ 7254639e.pdf. 56. The HEATOX Project, ‘‘Guidelines to Authorities and Consumer Organisations on Home Cooking and Consumption,’’ 2006. Accessed online at https://www.slv.se/upload/ heatox/documents/D59_guidelines_ to_authorities_and_consumer_organisations_ on_home_cooking_and_consumption.pdf. 57. The HEATOX Project, ‘‘Manual on strategies to food industries, restaurants, etc., to minimize acrylamide formation,’’ 2006. Accessed online at https://www.slv.se/upload/ heatox/documents/D60_manual_ on_strategies_to_food_industries_ restaurants_etc_to_minimise_acrylamide_ formation.pdf. 58. Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme Codex Committee on Contaminants in Foods (CCCF), ‘‘Draft Code of Practice for the Reduction of Acrylamide in Foods (N06–2006),’’ In: Report of the 3rd Session of the CCCF, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, March 23–27 2009, ALINORM 09/32/41, 2009, Appendix IV. Accessed online at https://www.codexalimentarius.net/ download/report/722/al32_41e.pdf. 59. European Commission Joint Research Centre—Institute for Reference Materials and Measurements, ‘‘Monitoring database on acrylamide levels in food,’’ 2006. Accessed online at https://irmm.jrc.ec.europa.eu/html/ activities/acrylamide/database.htm. 60. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), ‘‘Call for occurrence data on acrylamide levels in food,’’ 2007. Accessed online at https://www.efsa.europa.eu/EFSA/ efsa_locale-1178620753812_ 1178656289168.htm. 61. The Commission of the European Communities, ‘‘Commission Recommendation of 3 May 2007 on the monitoring of acrylamide levels in food (2007/331/EC),’’ Official Journal of the PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 European Union, 12/5/2007, L 123/33–40. Accessed online at https://eur-lex.europa.eu/ LexUriServ/site/en/oj/2007/l_123/ l_12320070512en00330040.pdf. ¨ 62. Bundesamt fur Verbraucherschutz und Lebensmittelsicherheit (BVL), ‘‘Concept of minimising acrylamide contents in foodstuffs,’’ 2005. Accessed online at https:// www.bvl.bund.de/cln_007/nn_521138/EN/ 01_Food/04_Acrylamid_en/acrylamid_ EN_node.html_nnn=true. 63. Bonneck, S., ‘‘Acrylamide Risk Governance in Germany,’’ In O. Renn and K.D. Walker, Eds., Global Risk Governance, 2008. Accessed online at https://www.irgc.org/ IMG/pdf/Chapter_11_Acrylamides_final.pdf. 64. Health Canada, ‘‘Health Canada’s Acrylamide Monitoring Program,’’ 2009. Accessed online at https://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ fn-an/securit/chem-chim/food-aliment/ acrylamide/monitoring-prog-surveillanceeng.php. 65. Office of the Attorney General, State of California, News release: ‘‘Atty. Gen. Brown Settles Potato Chip Lawsuit With Heinz, Frito-Lay & Kettle Foods,’’ August 1, 2008. Accessed online at https://ag.ca.gov/ newsalerts/release.php?id=1595&. Dated: August 17, 2009. David Horowitz, Assistant Commissioner for Policy. [FR Doc. E9–20495 Filed 8–25–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4160–01–S DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [60Day–09–0789] Proposed Data Collections Submitted for Public Comment and Recommendations In compliance with the requirement of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 for opportunity for public comment on proposed data collection projects, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) will publish periodic summaries of proposed projects. To request more information on the proposed projects or to obtain a copy of the data collection plans and instruments, call 404–639–5960 or send comments to Maryam I. Daneshvar, CDC Acting Reports Clearance Officer, 1600 Clifton Road, MS–D74, Atlanta, GA 30333 or send an e-mail to omb@cdc.gov. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) E:\FR\FM\26AUN1.SGM 26AUN1 43139 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 164 / Wednesday, August 26, 2009 / Notices 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 through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Written comments should be received within 60 days of this notice. Proposed Project Program Effectiveness Evaluation of Workplace Intervention for Intimate Partner Violence (IPV)—[OMB# 0920– 0789] [expiration date 12/31/09]— Extension—National Center for Injury Prevention and Control (NCIPC), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Background and Brief Description Intimate partner violence (IPV) affects a substantial number of Americans, and there has recently been increasing recognition of the impact it has on the workplace. In addition to direct impacts (batterers often stalk or even attack IPV victims at their place of work), IPV has indirect impacts on the workplace environment through lost productivity due to medical leave, absenteeism, and fear and distraction on the part of victims and coworkers. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) contracted with RTI International (RTI) to evaluate an ongoing workplace IPV prevention program being implemented at a national corporation. The purpose of the proposed evaluation is to document in detail the workplace IPV prevention activities delivered by the company, to determine the impact of these activities on short-term and longterm outcomes, and to determine the cost-effectiveness of the program. All managers at the corporate office of the corporation have been screened to assess training experiences. More indepth surveys were conducted with managers who had not completed the corporation’s IPV training. Approximately 200 managers have been surveyed at baseline, and 6 months later. Manager surveys focus on knowledge/awareness of IPV and company resources for IPV and number of referrals for IPV assistance. This extension is requested to cover the 12month follow-up administration of this survey. Due to unexpected delays at the evaluation site and an inability to field the 6-month follow up survey with managers when originally scheduled, the project will need to be continued an additional 3 months. Employees (N = 400) of those managers who completed the baseline survey using an anonymous web-based survey at baseline have been surveyed. These employees will also be surveyed 12 months later (during the reinstatement period) to assess their self-evaluated productivity, absenteeism, and perceptions of manager behavior. Responses of managers (and their employees) who received the IPV training in the study period (i.e., sometime between the baseline and 12 month surveys) with untrained managers will be compared. The study will provide CDC and employers information about the potential effectiveness and costeffectiveness of workplace IPV intervention strategies. There are no costs to respondents except their time to participate in the interview. ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN HOURS Number of responses per respondent Number of respondents Respondents Average burden per response (in hours) Total burden (in hours) Employee ......................................................................................................... Manager ........................................................................................................... 400 200 1 2 30/60 30/60 200 200 Total .......................................................................................................... ........................ ........................ ........................ 400 Dated: August 19, 2009. Maryam I. Daneshvar, Acting Reports Clearance Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. [FR Doc. E9–20578 Filed 8–25–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163–18–P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Administration for Children and Families Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Title: Grant Application Data Summary (GADS) Form. OMB No.: 0970–0328. Description: The Grant Application Data Summary (GADS) form collects information from applicants seeking grants from the Administration for Native Americans (ANA). Applicants complete the GADS form as part of their funding package. This standardized format allows ANA to evaluate applications for financial assistance and to determine the relative focus of the projects for which such assistance is requested. The data collected focuses on the specific ANA program area for which the applicant is applying. ANA awards annual grants in the following nine competitive areas: (1) Social & Economic Develop Strategies (SEDS); (2) Alaska SEDS; (3) Special Initiative: Family Preservation: Improving the Well-Being of Children Planning; (4) Special Initiative: Family Preservation: Improving the Well-Being of Children Implementation; (5) Native Language Preservation & Maintenance Assessment; (6) Native Language Preservation & Maintenance Planning; (7) Native Language Preservation & Maintenance Implementation; (8) Native Language Preservation & Maintenance Immersion; (9) Environmental Regulatory Enhancement. Respondents: Federally Recognized Indian Tribes, Tribal Governments, Native American Non-profits, Tribal Colleges and Universities. ANNUAL BURDEN ESTIMATES Instrument Number of respondents Number of responses per respondent Average burden hours per response Total burden hours Grant Application Data Summary (GADS) ...................................................... 500 1 0.50 250 VerDate Nov<24>2008 17:05 Aug 25, 2009 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\26AUN1.SGM 26AUN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 164 (Wednesday, August 26, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43138-43139]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-20578]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

[60Day-09-0789]


Proposed Data Collections Submitted for Public Comment and 
Recommendations

    In compliance with the requirement of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 for opportunity for public comment on 
proposed data collection projects, the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention (CDC) will publish periodic summaries of proposed projects. 
To request more information on the proposed projects or to obtain a 
copy of the data collection plans and instruments, call 404-639-5960 or 
send comments to Maryam I. Daneshvar, CDC Acting Reports Clearance 
Officer, 1600 Clifton Road, MS-D74, Atlanta, GA 30333 or send an e-mail 
to omb@cdc.gov.
    Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of 
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of 
the agency, including whether the information shall have practical 
utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the 
proposed collection of information; (c)

[[Page 43139]]

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 through the use of automated 
collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Written 
comments should be received within 60 days of this notice.

Proposed Project

    Program Effectiveness Evaluation of Workplace Intervention for 
Intimate Partner Violence (IPV)--[OMB 0920-0789] [expiration 
date 12/31/09]--Extension--National Center for Injury Prevention and 
Control (NCIPC), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Background and Brief Description

    Intimate partner violence (IPV) affects a substantial number of 
Americans, and there has recently been increasing recognition of the 
impact it has on the workplace. In addition to direct impacts 
(batterers often stalk or even attack IPV victims at their place of 
work), IPV has indirect impacts on the workplace environment through 
lost productivity due to medical leave, absenteeism, and fear and 
distraction on the part of victims and coworkers. The Centers for 
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) contracted with RTI International 
(RTI) to evaluate an ongoing workplace IPV prevention program being 
implemented at a national corporation. The purpose of the proposed 
evaluation is to document in detail the workplace IPV prevention 
activities delivered by the company, to determine the impact of these 
activities on short-term and long-term outcomes, and to determine the 
cost-effectiveness of the program. All managers at the corporate office 
of the corporation have been screened to assess training experiences. 
More in-depth surveys were conducted with managers who had not 
completed the corporation's IPV training. Approximately 200 managers 
have been surveyed at baseline, and 6 months later. Manager surveys 
focus on knowledge/awareness of IPV and company resources for IPV and 
number of referrals for IPV assistance. This extension is requested to 
cover the 12-month follow-up administration of this survey. Due to 
unexpected delays at the evaluation site and an inability to field the 
6-month follow up survey with managers when originally scheduled, the 
project will need to be continued an additional 3 months.
    Employees (N = 400) of those managers who completed the baseline 
survey using an anonymous web-based survey at baseline have been 
surveyed. These employees will also be surveyed 12 months later (during 
the reinstatement period) to assess their self-evaluated productivity, 
absenteeism, and perceptions of manager behavior. Responses of managers 
(and their employees) who received the IPV training in the study period 
(i.e., sometime between the baseline and 12 month surveys) with 
untrained managers will be compared. The study will provide CDC and 
employers information about the potential effectiveness and cost-
effectiveness of workplace IPV intervention strategies.
    There are no costs to respondents except their time to participate 
in the interview.

                                        Estimated Annualized Burden Hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Number of    Average burden
                   Respondents                       Number of     responses per   per response    Total burden
                                                    respondents     respondent      (in hours)      (in hours)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Employee........................................             400               1           30/60             200
Manager.........................................             200               2           30/60             200
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................  ..............  ..............  ..............             400
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Dated: August 19, 2009.
Maryam I. Daneshvar,
Acting Reports Clearance Officer, Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention.
[FR Doc. E9-20578 Filed 8-25-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.