Collection of Information; Proposed Extension of Approval; Comment Request-Publicly Available Consumer Product Safety Information Database, 49730-49735 [2013-19858]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
49730
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 158 / Thursday, August 15, 2013 / Notices
Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, National Marine
Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West
Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. The
mailbox address for providing email
comments is ITP.Nachman@noaa.gov.
NMFS is not responsible for email
comments sent to addresses other than
the one provided here. Comments sent
via email, including all attachments,
must not exceed a 25-megabyte file size.
Instructions: All comments received
are a part of the public record and will
generally be posted to https://
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
incidental.htm without change. All
Personal Identifying Information (for
example, name, address, etc.)
voluntarily submitted by the commenter
may be publicly accessible. Do not
submit Confidential Business
Information or otherwise sensitive or
protected information.
A copy of the USAF’s application may
be obtained by visiting the internet at:
https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
incidental.htm. Documents cited in this
notice may also be viewed, by
appointment, during regular business
hours, at the aforementioned address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Candace Nachman, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Background
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the
MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct
the Secretary of Commerce to allow,
upon request, the incidental, but not
intentional, taking of small numbers of
marine mammals by United States
citizens who engage in a specified
activity (other than commercial fishing)
within a specific geographical region if
certain findings are made and either
regulations are issued or, if the taking is
limited to harassment, a notice of a
proposed authorization is provided to
the public for review.
Authorization for incidental takings
shall be granted if NMFS finds that the
taking will have a negligible impact on
the species or stock(s), will not have an
unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for
subsistence uses (where relevant), and if
the permissible methods of taking and
requirements pertaining to the
mitigation, monitoring and reporting of
such takings are set forth. NMFS has
defined ‘‘negligible impact’’ in 50 CFR
216.103 as ‘‘. . . an impact resulting
from the specified activity that cannot
be reasonably expected to, and is not
reasonably likely to, adversely affect the
species or stock through effects on
annual rates of recruitment or survival.’’
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:43 Aug 14, 2013
Jkt 229001
With respect to military readiness
activities, the MMPA defines
‘‘harassment’’ as: ‘‘(i) any act that
injures or has the significant potential to
injure a marine mammal stock in the
wild [Level A Harassment]; or (ii) any
act that disturbs or is likely to disturb
a marine mammal or marine mammal
stock in the wild by causing disruption
of natural behavioral patterns,
including, but not limited to, migration,
surfacing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or
sheltering, to a point where such
behavioral patterns are abandoned or
significantly altered [Level B
Harassment].’’
Summary of Request
On June 24, 2013, NMFS received an
application from the USAF requesting a
letter of authorization (LOA) for the take
of five species of pinnipeds incidental
to USAF launch, aircraft, and helicopter
operations from VAFB launch
complexes and Delta Mariner
operations, cargo unloading activities,
and harbor maintenance dredging in
support of the Delta IV/EELV launch
activity on south VAFB. The USAF is
requesting a 5-year LOA for these
activities. These activities are classified
as military readiness activities. The
USAF states that these activities may
result in take of marine mammals from
noise or visual disturbance from rocket
and missile launches, as well as from
the use of heavy equipment during the
Delta Mariner off-loading operations,
cargo movement activities, increased
presence of personnel, and harbor
maintenance dredging. The USAF
requests to take five pinniped species by
Level B harassment.
Description of the Specified Activity
There are currently six active space
launch vehicle facilities at VAFB used
to launch satellites into polar orbit.
These facilities support launch
programs for the Atlas V, Delta II, Delta
IV, Falcon 9, Minotaur, and Taurus.
There are also a variety of small missiles
launched from various facilities on
North VAFB, including the Minuteman
III and several types of interceptor and
target vehicles for the Missile Defense
Agency. The VAFB airfield, located on
north VAFB, supports various aircraft
operations. A full description of the
activities to be conducted by the USAF
at VAFB, including descriptions of the
different space vehicles and missiles,
are described in the USAF’s application.
Additionally, United Launch Alliance,
on behalf of the USAF, proposes to
conduct Delta IV/EELV activities
(transport vessel operations, harbor
maintenance dredging, and cargo
movement activities). These activities
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
are described in Appendix A of the
USAF’s application.
Information Solicited
Interested persons may submit
information, suggestions, and comments
concerning the USAF’s request (see
ADDRESSES). All input related to the
USAF’s request and NMFS’ role in
governing the incidental taking of
marine mammals will be considered by
NMFS when developing, if appropriate,
the most effective regulations governing
the issuance of an LOA.
Dated: August 9, 2013.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2013–19840 Filed 8–14–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. CPSC–2010–0041]
Collection of Information; Proposed
Extension of Approval; Comment
Request—Publicly Available Consumer
Product Safety Information Database
Consumer Product Safety
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
As required by the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35), the Consumer Product
Safety Commission (CPSC or
Commission) requests comments on a
proposed extension of approval of a
collection of information for the
Publicly Available Consumer Product
Safety Information Database. The
Commission will consider all comments
received in response to this notice
before requesting an extension of
approval of this collection of
information from the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB).
DATES: The Office of the Secretary must
receive comments not later than October
15, 2013.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by Docket No. CPSC–2010–
0041, by any of the following methods:
Electronic Submissions: Submit
electronic comments to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
The Commission does not accept
comments submitted by electronic mail
(email), except through
www.regulations.gov. The Commission
encourages you to submit electronic
comments by using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal, as described above.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\15AUN1.SGM
15AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 158 / Thursday, August 15, 2013 / Notices
Written Submissions: Submit written
submissions in the following way: Mail/
Hand delivery/Courier (for paper, disk,
or CD–ROM submissions), preferably in
five copies, to: Office of the Secretary,
Consumer Product Safety Commission,
Room 820, 4330 East-West Highway,
Bethesda, MD 20814; telephone (301)
504–7923.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name and
docket number for this notice. All
comments received may be posted
without change, including any personal
identifiers, contact information, or other
personal information provided, to:
https://www.regulations.gov. Do not
submit confidential business
information, trade secret information, or
other sensitive or protected information
that you do not want to be available to
the public. If furnished at all, such
information should be submitted in
writing.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments received, go to: https://
www.regulations.gov, and insert the
docket number, CPSC–2010–0041, into
the ‘‘Search’’ box, and follow the
prompts.
For
further information contact: Robert H.
Squibb, Consumer Product Safety
Commission, 4330 East-West Highway,
Bethesda, MD 20814; (301) 504–7815, or
by email to: rsquibb@cpsc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
A. Background
Section 212 of the Consumer Product
Safety Improvement Act of 2008
(CPSIA) added section 6A to the
Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA),
which requires the Consumer Product
Safety Commission (CPSC or
Commission) to establish and maintain
a publicly available, searchable database
on the safety of consumer products and
other products or substances regulated
by the Commission (Database). Among
other things, section 6A of the CPSA
requires the Commission to collect
reports of harm from the public for
potential publication in the publicly
available Database and to collect and
publish comments about reports of harm
from manufacturers.
On May 24, 2010, the Commission
published a proposed rule on the
Database and announced that a
proposed collection of information in
conjunction with the Database had been
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:43 Aug 14, 2013
Jkt 229001
submitted to OMB for review and
clearance under 44 U.S.C. 3501–3520.75
FR 29156. The Commission issued a
final rule on the Database on December
9, 2010 (75 FR 76832). The final rule
interprets various statutory
requirements in section 6A of the CPSA
pertaining to the information to be
included in the Database and also
establishes provisions regarding
submitting reports of harm; providing
notice of reports of harm to
manufacturers; publishing reports of
harm and manufacturer comments in
the Database; and dealing with
confidential and materially inaccurate
information.
OMB approved the collection of
information for the Database under
control number 3041–0146. OMB’s
approval will expire on January 31,
2014. The Commission now proposes to
request an extension of approval of this
collection of information.
B. Information Collected Through the
Database
The primary purpose of this
information collection is to populate the
publicly searchable Database of
consumer product safety information
mandated by section 6A of the CPSA.
There are four components to the
information collection: Reports of harm,
manufacturer comments, branding
information, and the Small Batch
Manufacturer Registry (SBMR).
Reports of Harm: Reports of harm
communicate information regarding an
injury, illness, or death, or any risk (as
determined by the Commission) of
injury, illness, or death, relating to the
use of a consumer product. Reports can
be submitted to the CPSC by consumers;
local, state, or federal government
agencies; health care professionals;
child service providers; public safety
entities; and others. Reports may be
submitted in one of three ways: Via the
CPSC Web site
(www.SaferProducts.gov), by telephone
via a CPSC call center, or by email, fax,
or mail, using the incident report form
(available for download or printing via
the CPSC Web site). Reports may also
originate as a free-form letter or email.
Submitters must consent to inclusion of
their report of harm in the publicly
searchable Database.
Manufacturer Comments: A
manufacturer or private labeler may
submit a comment related to a report of
harm if the report of harm identifies the
manufacturer or private labeler and the
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
49731
CPSC transmits such report of harm to
the manufacturer. Manufacturers’
comments may be submitted through
the business portal, by email, mail, or
fax. The business portal is a feature of
the Database that allows manufacturers
who register on the business portal to
receive reports of harm and comment on
such reports through the business
portal. Use of the business portal
expedites the receipt of reports of harm
and business response times.
A manufacturer may request that the
Commission designate information in a
report of harm as confidential. Such a
request may be made using the business
portal, email, mail, or fax. Additionally,
any person or entity reviewing a report
of harm or a manufacturer’s comment
(either before or after publication in the
Database) and who believes that the
report contains materially inaccurate
information, may request that the report
or comment, or portions of the report or
comment, be excluded from the
Database. Such a request may be
submitted by email, mail, or fax, and
registered businesses also may utilize
the business portal for such requests.
Branding Information: Using the
business portal, registered businesses
may voluntarily submit branding
information to assist CPSC in correctly
and timely routing reports of harm.
Brand names may be licensed to an
entity other than the manufacturer.
CPSC’s accurate understanding of
applicable licensing arrangements
relating to consumer products increases
the likelihood that the correct
manufacturer is timely notified
regarding a report of harm.
Small Batch Manufacturers Registry:
The business portal also contains the
SBMR, which is the online mechanism
by which small batch manufacturers (as
defined in the CPSA) can identify
themselves to obtain relief from certain
third party testing requirements for
children’s products. To register as a
small batch manufacturer and receive
relief from third party testing, a business
must attest that the company’s total
gross revenue and the number of units
of the covered product manufactured
both fall within the statutory limits.
C. Estimated Burden
1. Estimated Annual Burden for
Respondents
We estimate the burden of this
collection of information as follows:
E:\FR\FM\15AUN1.SGM
15AUN1
49732
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 158 / Thursday, August 15, 2013 / Notices
TABLE 1—ESTIMATED ANNUAL REPORTING BURDEN FOR REPORTS OF HARM
Number of
respondents
Collection type
Response
frequency 1
Total annual
responses
Minutes per
response
Total burden,
in hours 2
Reports of Harm—submitted through Web site ..................
Reports of Harm—submitted by phone ...............................
Reports of Harm—submitted by mail, e-mail, fax ...............
8,030
3,749
904
1.02
1.00
6.71
8,207
3,749
6,067
12
10
20
1,641
625
2,022
Total ..............................................................................
12,683
........................
18,023
........................
4,288
TABLE 2—ESTIMATED ANNUAL REPORTING BURDEN FOR MANUFACTURER SUBMISSIONS
Number of
respondents
Collection type
Total ..............................................................................
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Manufacturer Comments—submitted through Web site .....
Manufacturer Comments—submitted by mail, email, fax ....
Requests to Treat Information as Confidential—submitted
through Web site ..............................................................
Requests to Treat Information as Confidential—submitted
by mail, email, fax ............................................................
Requests to Treat Information as Materially Inaccurate—
submitted through Web site .............................................
Requests to Treat Information as Materially Inaccurate—
submitted by mail, email, fax ...........................................
Voluntary Brand Identification ..............................................
Small Batch Manufacturer Identification ..............................
Response
frequency 1
Total annual
responses
Minutes per
response
Total burden,
in hours 2
624
132
8.20
1.25
5,117
165
116
146
9,893
402
11
1.27
14
15
4
0
0
0
45
0
231
2.46
568
438
4,146
83
545
578
1.25
2.25
1
104
1,227
578
468
10
10
811
205
96
2,204
........................
7,773
........................
15,557
Using the data in Tables 1 and 2
above, we estimate the annual reporting
cost to be $1,086,332. This estimate is
based on the sum of two estimated total
figures for reports of harm and
manufacturer submissions. The
estimated number of respondents and
responses are based on the actual
responses received in FY 2012. We
assume that the number of responses
and respondents will be similar in
future years.
Reports of Harm: Table 1 sets forth
the data used to estimate the burden
associated with submitting reports of
harm. We had previously estimated the
time associated with the electronic and
telephone submission of reports of harm
at 12 and 10 minutes, respectively, and
because we have had no indication that
these estimates are not appropriate or
accurate, we used those figures for
present purposes as well. We estimate
that the time associated with a paper or
PDF form would be 20 minutes, on
average.
To estimate the costs for submitting
reports of harm, we multiplied the
estimated total burden hours associated
with reports of harm (1,641 hours + 625
hours + 2,022 hours = 4,288 hours) by
an estimated total compensation for all
workers in private industry of $29.13
per hour,3 which results in an estimated
cost of $124,909 (4,288 hours × $29.13
per hour = $124,909).
Manufacturer Submissions: Table 2
sets forth the data used to estimate the
burden associated with manufacturers’
submissions to the Database. To gain
information on how long it takes a
manufacturer to submit a general
comment or a claim that a report
contains materially inaccurate
information through the business portal,
we contacted six businesses registered
on the business portal. We asked each
company how long it typically takes to
research, compose, and enter a comment
or a claim of materially inaccurate
information. We had observed that a
large percentage of the general
comments come from a few businesses
and assumed that the experience of a
business that submits many comments
each year would be different from one
that submits only a few. Accordingly,
we divided all responding businesses
into three groups based on the number
of general comments submitted in FY
2012, and then selected two businesses
from each group to contact. The first
group we contacted consisted of
businesses that submitted 50 or more
comments in FY 2012, accounting for 46
percent of all general comments
received. The second group we
contacted included businesses that
submitted 6 to 49 comments, accounting
for 36 percent of all general comments
received. The last group contacted
included businesses that submitted no
more than five comments, accounting
for 18 percent of all general comments
received.
To estimate the burden associated
with submitting a general comment
regarding a report of harm through the
business portal, we averaged the burden
provided by each company within each
group and then calculated a weighted
average from the three groups,
weighting each group by the proportion
of comments received from that group.
We found that the average time to
submit a general comment regarding a
report of harm is 116 minutes based on
the data in Table 3 (((10 minutes + 180
minutes)/2 companies)*.46 + ((10
minutes + 30 minutes)/2
companies)*.36 + ((240 minutes + 480
minutes)/2 companies)*.18 = 116
minutes).
1 Frequency of responses is calculated by dividing
the number of responses by the number of
respondents.
2 Numbers have been rounded.
3 U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor
Statistics, Table 9 of the Employer Costs for
Employee Compensation (ECEC), Private Industry,
goods-producing and service-providing industries,
by occupational group, March 2013 (data extracted
on 07/24/2013 from https://www.bls.gov/
news.release/ecec.t09.htm.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:43 Aug 14, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\15AUN1.SGM
15AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 158 / Thursday, August 15, 2013 / Notices
claims are very rare, and the few such
TABLE 3—ESTIMATED BURDEN TO
ENTER A GENERAL COMMENT IN THE claims that we have received have been
submitted through our Web site. That
DATABASE
General
comments
(minutes)
Company
Group 1 ..........
(>= 50 comments).
Group 2 ..........
(6–49 comments).
Group 3 ..........
(<= 5 comments).
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Group
Company A ....
Company B ....
10
180
Company A ....
Company B ....
10
30
Company A ....
Company B ....
240
480
Registered businesses generally
submit comments through our Web site.
Unregistered businesses submit
comments by mail, email, or fax. We
estimate that submitting comments in
this way takes a little longer because we
often must ask the businesses to amend
their submissions to include the
required certifications. Thus, we
estimated that, on average, comments
submitted by mail, email, or fax take 30
minutes longer than those submitted
through our Web site (116 minutes + 30
minutes = 146 minutes).
The submission of a claim of
materially inaccurate information is a
relatively rare event for all respondents,
so we averaged all responses together.
Four of the businesses contacted had
submitted claims of materially
inaccurate information during FY 2012.
We found that the average time to
submit a claim that a report of harm
contains a material inaccuracy is 438
minutes ((10 minutes + 120 minutes +
180 minutes + 1440 minutes)/4
companies = 438 minutes).
Registered businesses generally
submit claims through the business
portal. Unregistered businesses submit
claims by mail, email, or fax. We
estimate that submitting claims in this
way takes a little longer because we
often must ask the businesses to amend
their submissions to include the
required certifications. Thus, we
estimated that on average, claims
submitted by mail, email, or fax take 30
minutes longer than those submitted
through our Web site (438 minutes + 30
minutes = 468 minutes).
We previously had estimated that
confidential information claims
submitted through our Web site would
take 15 minutes because the information
to be entered would be readily
accessible by the respondent. We have
found that confidential information
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:43 Aug 14, 2013
Jkt 229001
limited experience did not suggest the
need for any update of the estimate for
Web site submission of confidential
information claims. Although we have
not received any confidential
information claims by mail, email, or
fax, based on our experience with
comments and claims of materially
inaccurate information, we estimate that
a confidential information claim
submitted by mail, email, or fax would
take 30 minutes longer than those
submitted through our Web site (15
minutes + 30 minutes = 45 minutes).
For voluntary brand identification, we
estimate that a response would take 10
minutes, on average. Most responses
consist only of the brand name and a
product description. In many cases a
business will submit multiple entries in
a brief period of time, and we can see
from the date and time stamps on these
records that an entry often takes less
than two minutes. CPSC staff enters the
same data in a similar form based on our
own research, and that experience was
also factored into our estimate.
For small batch manufacturer
identification, we estimate that a
response would take 10 minutes, on
average. The form consists of three
check boxes, and the information
should be readily accessible to the
respondent.
The responses summarized in Table 2
are generally submitted by
manufacturers. To avoid
underestimating the cost associated
with the collection of this data, we
assigned the higher hourly wage
associated with a manager or
professional in goods-producing
industries to these tasks. To estimate the
cost of manufacturer submissions, we
multiplied the estimated total burden
hours in Table 2 (15,557 hours) by an
estimated total compensation for a
manager or professional in goodsproducing industries of $61.80 per
hour,4 which results in an estimated
cost of $961,423 (15,557 hours × $61.80
per hour = $961,423).
Therefore, the total estimated annual
cost to respondents is $1,086,332
($124,909 burden for reports of harm +
4 U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor
Statistics, Table 9 of the Employer Costs for
Employee Compensation (ECEC), Private Industry,
goods-producing and service-providing industries,
by occupational group, March 2013 (data extracted
on 07/24/2013 from https://www.bls.gov/
news.release/ecec.t09.htm.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
49733
$961,423 burden for manufacturer
submissions = $1,086,332).
2. Estimated Annual Burden on
Government
We estimate the annualized cost to
the CPSC to be $1,028,794. This figure
is based on the costs for four categories
of work for the Database: Reports of
Harm, Materially Inaccurate Information
Claims, Manufacturer Comments, and
Small Batch Identification. Each
category is described below. No
government cost is associated with
Voluntary Brand Identification because
this information is entered directly into
the Database by the manufacturer with
no processing required by the
government. The information assists the
government in directing reports of harm
to the correct manufacturer. We did not
attempt to calculate separately the
government cost for claims of
confidential information because the
number of claims is so small. The time
to process these claims is included with
claims of materially inaccurate
information.
Reports of Harm: The Reports of Harm
category includes many different tasks.
Some costs related to this category are
from a data entry contract. Tasks related
to this contract include clerical coding
of the report, such as identifying the
type of consumer product reported and
the appropriate associated hazard, as
well as performing quality control on
the data in the report. The contractor
spends an estimated 3,380 hours per
year performing these tasks. With an
hourly rate of $32.57 for contracter
services, the annual cost to the
government is $110,087.
The Reports of Harm category also
includes sending consent for reports
when necessary, processing that consent
when CPSC receives it, determining
whether a product is out of CPSC’s
jurisdiction, and checking that pictures
and attachments do not have any
personally identifiable information. The
Reports category also entails notifying
manufacturers when one of their
products is reported, completing a risk
of harm determination form for every
report eligible for publication, referring
some reports to a Subject Matter Expert
(SME) within the CPSC for a
determination on whether the reports
meet the requirement of having a risk of
harm, and determining whether a report
meets all the statutory and regulatory
requirements for publication. Detailed
costs are described in Table 4.
E:\FR\FM\15AUN1.SGM
15AUN1
49734
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 158 / Thursday, August 15, 2013 / Notices
TABLE 4—ESTIMATED COSTS FOR REPORTS OF HARM TASK
Number of
hours
(annual)
Grade level
Total
compensation
per
hour
Total annual
cost
Contract .......................................................................................................................................
7 ...................................................................................................................................................
9 ...................................................................................................................................................
12 .................................................................................................................................................
13 .................................................................................................................................................
14 .................................................................................................................................................
15 .................................................................................................................................................
3380
1560
832
6396
884
2053
421
$32.57
33.03
40.53
58.78
69.67
82.60
96.84
$110,086.60
51,526.80
33,720.96
375,956.88
61,588.28
169,577.80
40,769.64
Total ......................................................................................................................................
12146
........................
843,226.96
Materially Inaccurate Information
(MII) Claims: The MII Claims category
includes reviewing and responding to
claims, participating in meetings where
the claims are discussed, and
completing a risk of harm determination
on reports when a company alleges that
a report does not describe a risk of
harm. Detailed costs are described in
Table 5.
TABLE 5—ESTIMATED COSTS FOR MII CLAIMS TASK
Number of
hours
(annual)
Grade level
Total
compensation
per
hour
Total annual
cost
12 .................................................................................................................................................
13 .................................................................................................................................................
14 .................................................................................................................................................
15 .................................................................................................................................................
SES ..............................................................................................................................................
364
1040
378
151
104
$58.78
69.67
82.60
96.84
103.91
$21,395.92
72,456.80
31,222.80
14,622.84
10,806.64
Total ......................................................................................................................................
2037
........................
150,505
Manufacturer Comments: The
Comments category includes reviewing
and accepting or rejecting comments.
Detailed costs are described in Table 6.
TABLE 6—ESTIMATED COSTS FOR MANUFACTURER COMMENTS TASK
Number of
hours
(annual)
Grade level
Total
compensation
per
hour
Total annual
cost
12 .................................................................................................................................................
13 .................................................................................................................................................
104
182
$58.78
69.67
$6,113.12
12,679.94
Total ......................................................................................................................................
286
........................
18,793.06
Small Batch Manufacturer
Identification: The Small Batch
Manufacturer Identification category
includes time spent posting the list of
small batch registrations, as well as
answering manufacturers’ questions on
registering as a Small Batch company
and what the implications to that
company of small batch registration.
Detailed costs are described in Table 7.
TABLE 7—ESTIMATED COSTS FOR SMALL BATCH TASK
Number of
hours
(annual)
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Grade level
Total
compensation
per
hour
Total annual
cost
15 .................................................................................................................................................
168
$96.84
$16,269.12
Total ......................................................................................................................................
168
........................
16,269.12
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:43 Aug 14, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\15AUN1.SGM
15AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 158 / Thursday, August 15, 2013 / Notices
We estimate the annualized cost to the
CPSC of $1,028,794 by adding the four
categories of work related to the
Database summarized in Tables 4
through 7 (Reports of Harm
($843,226.96) + MII Claims
($150,505.00) + Manufacturer
Comments ($18,793.06) + Small Batch
Identification ($16,269.12) =
$1,028,794.14).
This information collection renewal
request based on an estimated 19,845
burden hours per year for the Database
is a decrease of 17,284 hours since this
collection of information was last
approved by OMB in 2011. The decrease
in burden is due primarily to the fact
that the number of responses estimated
in our original request overstated the
number of actual responses submitted;
we thus lowered the estimated number
of responses based on actual experience
since the original request.
D. Request for Comments
The Commission solicits written
comments from all interested persons
about the proposed collection of
information. The Commission
specifically solicits information relevant
to the following topics:
• Whether the collection of
information described above is
necessary for the proper performance of
the Commission’s functions,
particularly with respect to the
Database, including whether the
information would have practical
utility;
• Whether the estimated burden of
the proposed collection of information
is accurate;
• Whether the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be collected
could be enhanced; and
• Whether the burden imposed by the
collection of information could be
minimized by use of automated,
electronic, or other technological
collection techniques, or other forms of
information technology.
Dated: August 12, 2013.
Todd A. Stevenson,
Secretary, Consumer Product Safety
Commission.
[FR Doc. 2013–19858 Filed 8–14–13; 8:45 am]
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
BILLING CODE 6355–01–P
CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND
COMMUNITY SERVICE
Information Collection; Submission for
OMB Review, Comment Request
Corporation for National and
Community Service.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:43 Aug 14, 2013
Jkt 229001
The Corporation for National
and Community Service (CNCS) has
submitted a public information
collection request (ICR) entitled Peer
Reviewer Application Instructions for
review and approval in accordance with
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
Public Law 104–13, (44 U.S.C. Chapter
35). Copies of this ICR, with applicable
supporting documentation, may be
obtained by calling the Corporation for
National and Community Service,
Vielka Garibaldi, at (202) 606–6886 or
email to vgaribaldi@cns.gov. Individuals
who use a telecommunications device
for the deaf (TTY–TDD) may call 1–800–
833–3722 between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00
p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through
Friday.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be
submitted, identified by the title of the
information collection activity, to the
Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Attn: Ms. Sharon Mar, OMB
Desk Officer for the Corporation for
National and Community Service, by
any of the following two methods
within 30 days from the date of
publication in the Federal Register:
(1) By fax to: (202) 395–6974,
Attention: Ms. Sharon Mar, OMB Desk
Officer for the Corporation for National
and Community Service; or
(2) By email to: smar@omb.eop.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The OMB
is particularly interested in comments
which:
• Evaluate whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary
for the proper performance of the
functions of CNCS, including whether
the information will have practical
utility;
• Evaluate the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information,
including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
• Propose ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and
• Propose ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information
on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate
automated, electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection
techniques or other forms of information
technology.
SUMMARY:
Comments
A 60-day notice requesting public
comment was published in the Federal
Register on May 30, 2013. This
comment period ended July 30, 2013.
CNCS received no responsive comments
to the 60-day notice.
Description: CNCS seeks to renew the
current information collection. Minor
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
49735
revisions are proposed to clarify eGrants
instructions and reflect adjustments to
the Corporation for National and
Community Service eGrants system. The
information collection will otherwise be
used in the same manner as the existing
application. CNCS also seeks to
continue using the current application
until the revised application is
approved by OMB. The current
application is due to expire on
September 30, 2013.
Type of Review: Renewal.
Agency: Corporation for National and
Community Service.
Title: Peer Reviewer Application
Instructions.
OMB Number: 3045–0090.
Agency Number: None.
Affected Public: Individuals who are
interested in serving as peer reviewers
and peer review panel coordinators for
CNCS.
Total Respondents: 2,000.
Frequency: One time to complete.
Average Time Per Response: Averages
40 minutes.
Estimated Total Burden Hours: 1,333
hours.
Total Burden Cost (capital/startup):
None.
Total Burden Cost (operating/
maintenance): None.
Dated: August 8, 2013.
Vielka Garibaldi,
Director, Office of Grants Policy and
Operations.
[FR Doc. 2013–19792 Filed 8–14–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6050–28–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Army; Corps of
Engineers
Intent To Prepare a Draft
Environmental Impact Statement for
Dam Safety Study, Lake Lewisville
Dam, Elm Fork Trinity River, Denton
County, Texas
Department of the Army, U. S.
Army Corps of Engineers, DoD.
ACTION: Notice of intent.
AGENCY:
Authorized by the River and
Harbor Act of March 2, 1945, Lake
Lewisville embankment construction
began in December 1948 with
completion in August 1955. The project
includes an earthen embankment that is
approximately 32,000 feet in length and
has a maximum height of 125 feet at
elevation 560 feet (all elevations are
NGVD) with gated outlet works and an
uncontrolled concrete ogee weir
spillway. The primary purposes of the
project are flood risk management,
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\15AUN1.SGM
15AUN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 158 (Thursday, August 15, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49730-49735]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-19858]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION
[Docket No. CPSC-2010-0041]
Collection of Information; Proposed Extension of Approval;
Comment Request--Publicly Available Consumer Product Safety Information
Database
AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44
U.S.C. Chapter 35), the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC or
Commission) requests comments on a proposed extension of approval of a
collection of information for the Publicly Available Consumer Product
Safety Information Database. The Commission will consider all comments
received in response to this notice before requesting an extension of
approval of this collection of information from the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB).
DATES: The Office of the Secretary must receive comments not later than
October 15, 2013.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. CPSC-2010-
0041, by any of the following methods:
Electronic Submissions: Submit electronic comments to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments. The Commission does not accept
comments submitted by electronic mail (email), except through
www.regulations.gov. The Commission encourages you to submit electronic
comments by using the Federal eRulemaking Portal, as described above.
[[Page 49731]]
Written Submissions: Submit written submissions in the following
way: Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for paper, disk, or CD-ROM
submissions), preferably in five copies, to: Office of the Secretary,
Consumer Product Safety Commission, Room 820, 4330 East-West Highway,
Bethesda, MD 20814; telephone (301) 504-7923.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name
and docket number for this notice. All comments received may be posted
without change, including any personal identifiers, contact
information, or other personal information provided, to: https://www.regulations.gov. Do not submit confidential business information,
trade secret information, or other sensitive or protected information
that you do not want to be available to the public. If furnished at
all, such information should be submitted in writing.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to: https://www.regulations.gov, and insert the
docket number, CPSC-2010-0041, into the ``Search'' box, and follow the
prompts.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information contact:
Robert H. Squibb, Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East-West
Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814; (301) 504-7815, or by email to:
rsquibb@cpsc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
Section 212 of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008
(CPSIA) added section 6A to the Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA),
which requires the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC or
Commission) to establish and maintain a publicly available, searchable
database on the safety of consumer products and other products or
substances regulated by the Commission (Database). Among other things,
section 6A of the CPSA requires the Commission to collect reports of
harm from the public for potential publication in the publicly
available Database and to collect and publish comments about reports of
harm from manufacturers.
On May 24, 2010, the Commission published a proposed rule on the
Database and announced that a proposed collection of information in
conjunction with the Database had been submitted to OMB for review and
clearance under 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.75 FR 29156. The Commission issued
a final rule on the Database on December 9, 2010 (75 FR 76832). The
final rule interprets various statutory requirements in section 6A of
the CPSA pertaining to the information to be included in the Database
and also establishes provisions regarding submitting reports of harm;
providing notice of reports of harm to manufacturers; publishing
reports of harm and manufacturer comments in the Database; and dealing
with confidential and materially inaccurate information.
OMB approved the collection of information for the Database under
control number 3041-0146. OMB's approval will expire on January 31,
2014. The Commission now proposes to request an extension of approval
of this collection of information.
B. Information Collected Through the Database
The primary purpose of this information collection is to populate
the publicly searchable Database of consumer product safety information
mandated by section 6A of the CPSA. There are four components to the
information collection: Reports of harm, manufacturer comments,
branding information, and the Small Batch Manufacturer Registry (SBMR).
Reports of Harm: Reports of harm communicate information regarding
an injury, illness, or death, or any risk (as determined by the
Commission) of injury, illness, or death, relating to the use of a
consumer product. Reports can be submitted to the CPSC by consumers;
local, state, or federal government agencies; health care
professionals; child service providers; public safety entities; and
others. Reports may be submitted in one of three ways: Via the CPSC Web
site (www.SaferProducts.gov), by telephone via a CPSC call center, or
by email, fax, or mail, using the incident report form (available for
download or printing via the CPSC Web site). Reports may also originate
as a free-form letter or email. Submitters must consent to inclusion of
their report of harm in the publicly searchable Database.
Manufacturer Comments: A manufacturer or private labeler may submit
a comment related to a report of harm if the report of harm identifies
the manufacturer or private labeler and the CPSC transmits such report
of harm to the manufacturer. Manufacturers' comments may be submitted
through the business portal, by email, mail, or fax. The business
portal is a feature of the Database that allows manufacturers who
register on the business portal to receive reports of harm and comment
on such reports through the business portal. Use of the business portal
expedites the receipt of reports of harm and business response times.
A manufacturer may request that the Commission designate
information in a report of harm as confidential. Such a request may be
made using the business portal, email, mail, or fax. Additionally, any
person or entity reviewing a report of harm or a manufacturer's comment
(either before or after publication in the Database) and who believes
that the report contains materially inaccurate information, may request
that the report or comment, or portions of the report or comment, be
excluded from the Database. Such a request may be submitted by email,
mail, or fax, and registered businesses also may utilize the business
portal for such requests.
Branding Information: Using the business portal, registered
businesses may voluntarily submit branding information to assist CPSC
in correctly and timely routing reports of harm. Brand names may be
licensed to an entity other than the manufacturer. CPSC's accurate
understanding of applicable licensing arrangements relating to consumer
products increases the likelihood that the correct manufacturer is
timely notified regarding a report of harm.
Small Batch Manufacturers Registry: The business portal also
contains the SBMR, which is the online mechanism by which small batch
manufacturers (as defined in the CPSA) can identify themselves to
obtain relief from certain third party testing requirements for
children's products. To register as a small batch manufacturer and
receive relief from third party testing, a business must attest that
the company's total gross revenue and the number of units of the
covered product manufactured both fall within the statutory limits.
C. Estimated Burden
1. Estimated Annual Burden for Respondents
We estimate the burden of this collection of information as
follows:
[[Page 49732]]
Table 1--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden for Reports of Harm
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Response Total annual Minutes per Total burden,
Collection type respondents frequency \1\ responses response in hours \2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reports of Harm--submitted 8,030 1.02 8,207 12 1,641
through Web site...............
Reports of Harm--submitted by 3,749 1.00 3,749 10 625
phone..........................
Reports of Harm--submitted by 904 6.71 6,067 20 2,022
mail, e-mail, fax..............
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................... 12,683 .............. 18,023 .............. 4,288
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Frequency of responses is calculated by dividing the number
of responses by the number of respondents.
\2\ Numbers have been rounded.
Table 2--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden for Manufacturer Submissions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Response Total annual Minutes per Total burden,
Collection type respondents frequency \1\ responses response in hours \2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manufacturer Comments--submitted 624 8.20 5,117 116 9,893
through Web site...............
Manufacturer Comments--submitted 132 1.25 165 146 402
by mail, email, fax............
Requests to Treat Information as 11 1.27 14 15 4
Confidential--submitted through
Web site.......................
Requests to Treat Information as 0 0 0 45 0
Confidential--submitted by
mail, email, fax...............
Requests to Treat Information as 231 2.46 568 438 4,146
Materially Inaccurate--
submitted through Web site.....
Requests to Treat Information as 83 1.25 104 468 811
Materially Inaccurate--
submitted by mail, email, fax..
Voluntary Brand Identification.. 545 2.25 1,227 10 205
Small Batch Manufacturer 578 1 578 10 96
Identification.................
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................... 2,204 .............. 7,773 .............. 15,557
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using the data in Tables 1 and 2 above, we estimate the annual
reporting cost to be $1,086,332. This estimate is based on the sum of
two estimated total figures for reports of harm and manufacturer
submissions. The estimated number of respondents and responses are
based on the actual responses received in FY 2012. We assume that the
number of responses and respondents will be similar in future years.
Reports of Harm: Table 1 sets forth the data used to estimate the
burden associated with submitting reports of harm. We had previously
estimated the time associated with the electronic and telephone
submission of reports of harm at 12 and 10 minutes, respectively, and
because we have had no indication that these estimates are not
appropriate or accurate, we used those figures for present purposes as
well. We estimate that the time associated with a paper or PDF form
would be 20 minutes, on average.
To estimate the costs for submitting reports of harm, we multiplied
the estimated total burden hours associated with reports of harm (1,641
hours + 625 hours + 2,022 hours = 4,288 hours) by an estimated total
compensation for all workers in private industry of $29.13 per hour,\3\
which results in an estimated cost of $124,909 (4,288 hours x $29.13
per hour = $124,909).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Table
9 of the Employer Costs for Employee Compensation (ECEC), Private
Industry, goods-producing and service-providing industries, by
occupational group, March 2013 (data extracted on 07/24/2013 from
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.t09.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manufacturer Submissions: Table 2 sets forth the data used to
estimate the burden associated with manufacturers' submissions to the
Database. To gain information on how long it takes a manufacturer to
submit a general comment or a claim that a report contains materially
inaccurate information through the business portal, we contacted six
businesses registered on the business portal. We asked each company how
long it typically takes to research, compose, and enter a comment or a
claim of materially inaccurate information. We had observed that a
large percentage of the general comments come from a few businesses and
assumed that the experience of a business that submits many comments
each year would be different from one that submits only a few.
Accordingly, we divided all responding businesses into three groups
based on the number of general comments submitted in FY 2012, and then
selected two businesses from each group to contact. The first group we
contacted consisted of businesses that submitted 50 or more comments in
FY 2012, accounting for 46 percent of all general comments received.
The second group we contacted included businesses that submitted 6 to
49 comments, accounting for 36 percent of all general comments
received. The last group contacted included businesses that submitted
no more than five comments, accounting for 18 percent of all general
comments received.
To estimate the burden associated with submitting a general comment
regarding a report of harm through the business portal, we averaged the
burden provided by each company within each group and then calculated a
weighted average from the three groups, weighting each group by the
proportion of comments received from that group. We found that the
average time to submit a general comment regarding a report of harm is
116 minutes based on the data in Table 3 (((10 minutes + 180 minutes)/2
companies)*.46 + ((10 minutes + 30 minutes)/2 companies)*.36 + ((240
minutes + 480 minutes)/2 companies)*.18 = 116 minutes).
[[Page 49733]]
Table 3--Estimated Burden To Enter a General Comment in the Database
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General
Group Company comments
(minutes)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Group 1............................. Company A............. 10
(>= 50 comments).................... Company B............. 180
Group 2............................. Company A............. 10
(6-49 comments)..................... Company B............. 30
Group 3............................. Company A............. 240
(<= 5 comments)..................... Company B............. 480
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Registered businesses generally submit comments through our Web
site. Unregistered businesses submit comments by mail, email, or fax.
We estimate that submitting comments in this way takes a little longer
because we often must ask the businesses to amend their submissions to
include the required certifications. Thus, we estimated that, on
average, comments submitted by mail, email, or fax take 30 minutes
longer than those submitted through our Web site (116 minutes + 30
minutes = 146 minutes).
The submission of a claim of materially inaccurate information is a
relatively rare event for all respondents, so we averaged all responses
together. Four of the businesses contacted had submitted claims of
materially inaccurate information during FY 2012. We found that the
average time to submit a claim that a report of harm contains a
material inaccuracy is 438 minutes ((10 minutes + 120 minutes + 180
minutes + 1440 minutes)/4 companies = 438 minutes).
Registered businesses generally submit claims through the business
portal. Unregistered businesses submit claims by mail, email, or fax.
We estimate that submitting claims in this way takes a little longer
because we often must ask the businesses to amend their submissions to
include the required certifications. Thus, we estimated that on
average, claims submitted by mail, email, or fax take 30 minutes longer
than those submitted through our Web site (438 minutes + 30 minutes =
468 minutes).
We previously had estimated that confidential information claims
submitted through our Web site would take 15 minutes because the
information to be entered would be readily accessible by the
respondent. We have found that confidential information claims are very
rare, and the few such claims that we have received have been submitted
through our Web site. That limited experience did not suggest the need
for any update of the estimate for Web site submission of confidential
information claims. Although we have not received any confidential
information claims by mail, email, or fax, based on our experience with
comments and claims of materially inaccurate information, we estimate
that a confidential information claim submitted by mail, email, or fax
would take 30 minutes longer than those submitted through our Web site
(15 minutes + 30 minutes = 45 minutes).
For voluntary brand identification, we estimate that a response
would take 10 minutes, on average. Most responses consist only of the
brand name and a product description. In many cases a business will
submit multiple entries in a brief period of time, and we can see from
the date and time stamps on these records that an entry often takes
less than two minutes. CPSC staff enters the same data in a similar
form based on our own research, and that experience was also factored
into our estimate.
For small batch manufacturer identification, we estimate that a
response would take 10 minutes, on average. The form consists of three
check boxes, and the information should be readily accessible to the
respondent.
The responses summarized in Table 2 are generally submitted by
manufacturers. To avoid underestimating the cost associated with the
collection of this data, we assigned the higher hourly wage associated
with a manager or professional in goods-producing industries to these
tasks. To estimate the cost of manufacturer submissions, we multiplied
the estimated total burden hours in Table 2 (15,557 hours) by an
estimated total compensation for a manager or professional in goods-
producing industries of $61.80 per hour,\4\ which results in an
estimated cost of $961,423 (15,557 hours x $61.80 per hour = $961,423).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Table
9 of the Employer Costs for Employee Compensation (ECEC), Private
Industry, goods-producing and service-providing industries, by
occupational group, March 2013 (data extracted on 07/24/2013 from
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.t09.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Therefore, the total estimated annual cost to respondents is
$1,086,332 ($124,909 burden for reports of harm + $961,423 burden for
manufacturer submissions = $1,086,332).
2. Estimated Annual Burden on Government
We estimate the annualized cost to the CPSC to be $1,028,794. This
figure is based on the costs for four categories of work for the
Database: Reports of Harm, Materially Inaccurate Information Claims,
Manufacturer Comments, and Small Batch Identification. Each category is
described below. No government cost is associated with Voluntary Brand
Identification because this information is entered directly into the
Database by the manufacturer with no processing required by the
government. The information assists the government in directing reports
of harm to the correct manufacturer. We did not attempt to calculate
separately the government cost for claims of confidential information
because the number of claims is so small. The time to process these
claims is included with claims of materially inaccurate information.
Reports of Harm: The Reports of Harm category includes many
different tasks. Some costs related to this category are from a data
entry contract. Tasks related to this contract include clerical coding
of the report, such as identifying the type of consumer product
reported and the appropriate associated hazard, as well as performing
quality control on the data in the report. The contractor spends an
estimated 3,380 hours per year performing these tasks. With an hourly
rate of $32.57 for contracter services, the annual cost to the
government is $110,087.
The Reports of Harm category also includes sending consent for
reports when necessary, processing that consent when CPSC receives it,
determining whether a product is out of CPSC's jurisdiction, and
checking that pictures and attachments do not have any personally
identifiable information. The Reports category also entails notifying
manufacturers when one of their products is reported, completing a risk
of harm determination form for every report eligible for publication,
referring some reports to a Subject Matter Expert (SME) within the CPSC
for a determination on whether the reports meet the requirement of
having a risk of harm, and determining whether a report meets all the
statutory and regulatory requirements for publication. Detailed costs
are described in Table 4.
[[Page 49734]]
Table 4--Estimated Costs for Reports of Harm Task
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total
Grade level Number of compensation Total annual
hours (annual) per hour cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contract........................................................ 3380 $32.57 $110,086.60
7............................................................... 1560 33.03 51,526.80
9............................................................... 832 40.53 33,720.96
12.............................................................. 6396 58.78 375,956.88
13.............................................................. 884 69.67 61,588.28
14.............................................................. 2053 82.60 169,577.80
15.............................................................. 421 96.84 40,769.64
-----------------------------------------------
Total....................................................... 12146 .............. 843,226.96
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Materially Inaccurate Information (MII) Claims: The MII Claims
category includes reviewing and responding to claims, participating in
meetings where the claims are discussed, and completing a risk of harm
determination on reports when a company alleges that a report does not
describe a risk of harm. Detailed costs are described in Table 5.
Table 5--Estimated Costs for MII Claims Task
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total
Grade level Number of compensation Total annual
hours (annual) per hour cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12.............................................................. 364 $58.78 $21,395.92
13.............................................................. 1040 69.67 72,456.80
14.............................................................. 378 82.60 31,222.80
15.............................................................. 151 96.84 14,622.84
SES............................................................. 104 103.91 10,806.64
-----------------------------------------------
Total....................................................... 2037 .............. 150,505
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manufacturer Comments: The Comments category includes reviewing and
accepting or rejecting comments. Detailed costs are described in Table
6.
Table 6--Estimated Costs for Manufacturer Comments Task
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total
Grade level Number of compensation Total annual
hours (annual) per hour cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12.............................................................. 104 $58.78 $6,113.12
13.............................................................. 182 69.67 12,679.94
-----------------------------------------------
Total....................................................... 286 .............. 18,793.06
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Small Batch Manufacturer Identification: The Small Batch
Manufacturer Identification category includes time spent posting the
list of small batch registrations, as well as answering manufacturers'
questions on registering as a Small Batch company and what the
implications to that company of small batch registration. Detailed
costs are described in Table 7.
Table 7--Estimated Costs for Small Batch Task
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total
Grade level Number of compensation Total annual
hours (annual) per hour cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
15.............................................................. 168 $96.84 $16,269.12
-----------------------------------------------
Total....................................................... 168 .............. 16,269.12
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 49735]]
We estimate the annualized cost to the CPSC of $1,028,794 by adding the
four categories of work related to the Database summarized in Tables 4
through 7 (Reports of Harm ($843,226.96) + MII Claims ($150,505.00) +
Manufacturer Comments ($18,793.06) + Small Batch Identification
($16,269.12) = $1,028,794.14).
This information collection renewal request based on an estimated
19,845 burden hours per year for the Database is a decrease of 17,284
hours since this collection of information was last approved by OMB in
2011. The decrease in burden is due primarily to the fact that the
number of responses estimated in our original request overstated the
number of actual responses submitted; we thus lowered the estimated
number of responses based on actual experience since the original
request.
D. Request for Comments
The Commission solicits written comments from all interested
persons about the proposed collection of information. The Commission
specifically solicits information relevant to the following topics:
Whether the collection of information described above is
necessary for the proper performance of the Commission's functions,
particularly with respect to the Database, including whether the
information would have practical utility;
Whether the estimated burden of the proposed collection of
information is accurate;
Whether the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected could be enhanced; and
Whether the burden imposed by the collection of
information could be minimized by use of automated, electronic, or
other technological collection techniques, or other forms of
information technology.
Dated: August 12, 2013.
Todd A. Stevenson,
Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission.
[FR Doc. 2013-19858 Filed 8-14-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6355-01-P
