Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Consumer Product Risk Reduction Valuation Study: Cognitive Interviews & Focus Groups, 17543-17544 [2020-06514]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 61 / Monday, March 30, 2020 / Notices
be less expensive than purchasing
observer coverage to fish in GCAs, so
this exemption would provide an
incentive for vessels to participate in the
EFP. This exemption would also allow
NMFS to assess the feasibility of using
EM and portside sampling to monitor
midwater trawl herring trips fished in
GCAs.
This EFP would also exempt
participating vessels from season and
area restrictions at § 648.202(b)(2) and
(4) when operationally discarding catch.
The EFP would authorize participating
vessels to operationally discard catch in
GCAs without triggering the
consequence measures described at
§ 648.202(b)(4). Operational discards in
the herring fishery are defined as ‘‘small
amounts of fish that cannot be pumped
on board and remain in the codend or
seine at the end of pumping
operations.’’ Midwater trawl vessels are
permitted to operationally discard
outside of GCAs without triggering
consequence measures, but not inside
GCAs. This exemption would allow
participating vessels to maintain
operational consistency inside and
outside of GCAs. This exemption would
also allow NMFS to collect additional
information on the frequency of
operational discards in GCAs. This
exemption would not undermine
conservation objectives because
participating vessels would be fully
monitored on 100 percent of trips and
would be fully accountable for their
catch in GCAs.
If approved, project partners may
request minor modifications and
extensions to the EFP throughout the
year. EFP modifications and extensions
may be granted without further notice if
they are deemed essential to facilitate
completion of the proposed research
and have minimal impacts that do not
change the scope or impact of the
initially approved EFP request. Any
fishing activity conducted outside the
scope of the exempted fishing activity
would be prohibited.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with NOTICES
Dated: March 25, 2020.
He´le`ne M.N. Scalliet,
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2020–06542 Filed 3–27–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:05 Mar 27, 2020
Jkt 250001
17543
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY
COMMISSION
includes cognitive interviews and focus
groups.
[Docket No. CPSC–2019–0035]
A. Consumer Product Risk Reduction
Valuation Study
CPSC is authorized under section 5(a)
of the Consumer Product Safety Act
(CPSA), 15 U.S.C. 2054(a), to conduct
studies and investigations relating to the
causes and prevention of deaths,
accidents, injuries, illnesses, other
health impairments, and economic
losses associated with consumer
products. Section 5(b) of the CPSA, 15
U.S.C. 2054(b), further provides that
CPSC may conduct research, studies,
and investigations on the safety of
consumer products or test consumer
products and develop product safety
test methods and testing devices.
CPSC issues regulations to reduce the
risk of fatal injuries or illnesses
associated with the use of consumer
products. To value reductions in the
risk of fatalities, CPSC and other federal
agencies rely on estimates of the value
per statistical life (VSL), which are
derived from research on individuals’
willingness to pay (WTP), consistent
with the conceptual framework for
benefit-cost analysis. Most of the studies
on which these estimates are based
calculate WTP by evaluating tradeoffs
made by workers in risky occupations,
and thus, concentrate on certain
populations (working-age males).
However, the type of risks and
populations that are addressed by CPSC
regulations often involve children.
Although there are a few completed
studies that address the value of risk
reductions that accrue to children, the
available literature is limited and largely
unrelated to the types of risks addressed
by CPSC rulemakings.1 Due to the
absence of children from labor markets
and the lack of observable market data,
the majority of the studies employ
stated preference methods. That method
asks individuals, usually through
questionnaires, the economic value that
they attach to a perceived risk, based on
constructed or hypothetical markets.
Although the existing studies suggest
Agency Information Collection
Activities; Submission for OMB
Review; Comment Request; Consumer
Product Risk Reduction Valuation
Study: Cognitive Interviews & Focus
Groups
Consumer Product Safety
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
As required under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA), the Consumer Product Safety
Commission (CPSC) announces that
CPSC has submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) a new
proposed collection of information by
the agency to conduct cognitive
interviews and focus groups that will
assess consumer comprehension of risk
associated with consumer products. On
December 30, 2019, the CPSC published
a notice in the Federal Register
announcing the agency’s intent to seek
approval of this collection of
information. The CPSC received no
comments in response to that notice.
Therefore, by publication of this notice,
the CPSC announces that it has
submitted to the OMB a request for
approval of this collection of
information.
SUMMARY:
Submit written or electronic
comments on the collection of
information by May 29, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments about
this request by email: OIRA_
submission@omb.eop.gov or fax: 202–
395–6881. Comments by mail should be
sent to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk
Officer for the CPSC, Office of
Management and Budget, Room 10235,
725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC
20503. In addition, written comments
that are sent to OMB also should be
submitted electronically at https://
www.regulations.gov, under Docket No.
CPSC–2019–0035.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Bretford Griffin, Consumer Product
Safety Commission, 4330 East West
Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814; (301)
504–7037, or by email to: BGriffin@
cpsc.gov.
DATES:
Under the
PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520), federal
agencies must obtain approval from
OMB for each collection of information
they conduct or sponsor. ‘‘Collection of
information’’ is defined in 44 U.S.C.
3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
ˇ cˇasny´. 2011.
1 See, e.g., Alberini, A. and M. S
Context and the VSL: Evidence from a Stated
Preference Study in Italy and Czech Republic.
Environmental and Resource Economics, 49(4):
511–538; Gerking, S., M. Dickie, and M. Veronesi.
2014. Valuation of Human Health: An Integrated
Model of WTP for Mortality and Morbidity Risk
Reductions. Journal of Environmental Economics
and Management, 68(1): 20–45; Hammitt, J.K. and
K. Haninger. 2010. Valuing Fatal Risk to Children
and Adults: Effects of Disease, Latency and Risk
Aversion. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 40: 57–
83; Hammitt, J.K. and D. Herrera. 2017. Peeling
Back the Onion: Using Latent Class Analysis to
Uncover Heterogeneous Responses to Stated
Preference Surveys. Journal of Environmental
Economics and Management, in press.
E:\FR\FM\30MRN1.SGM
30MRN1
17544
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 61 / Monday, March 30, 2020 / Notices
higher values for reducing risks to
children than reductions to adults, they
do not adequately determine the extent
to which values for fatal risk reductions
differ for adults versus children for risks
associated with consumer products, nor
do they adequately explain the level of
respondent comprehension of relevant
risk concepts.
CPSC seeks to conduct additional
research to evaluate whether reductions
in consumer product-related risks are
valued differently when the beneficiary
of the reduction is a child versus an
adult. To assess comprehension of risk
concepts, CPSC intends to conduct
qualitative pretesting, in the form of
cognitive interviews and focus groups,
based on best practices used in statedpreference study design. CPSC will
conduct an initial set of eight cognitive
interviews aimed specifically at topics
related to risk communication and risk
comprehension from homeowners with
at least one child under the age of 12.
Based on the results of the initial
cognitive interviews, CPSC will inform
OMB of any changes that are made for
conducting a subsequent set of focus
groups. Those focus groups will consist
of 40 respondents and 16 additional
cognitive interviews that will query the
B. Burden Hours
The estimated annual burden hours
are as follows:
Estimated
burden per
respondent
(hours)
Number of
responses
Activity
Total burden
(hours)
Cognitive Interviews I (Risk Communication and Comprehension) ............................................
Focus Group Sessions (Household Risks and Consumer Products) .........................................
Cognitive Interviews II (Household Risks and Consumer Products) ..........................................
8
40
16
1.5
2
1.5
12
80
24
Total ......................................................................................................................................
........................
........................
116
We estimate the total annual dollar
value of this collection to be $4,265.
This estimate is based on an average of
$36.77/hr. compensation, including
benefits, from the National
Compensation Survey published by the
Bureau of Labor Statistics (U.S. Bureau
of Labor Statistics, ‘‘Employer Costs for
Employee Compensation by
ownership,’’ Dec. 2018, Table 1, total
compensation for civilian workers:
https://www.bls.gov/ncs/). The total cost
to the federal government for the
contract to design and conduct the
proposed survey is $117,458.
C. Submission to OMB
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with NOTICES
respondents on fatal household risks
related to consumer products. The
interviews and focus groups are
designed to assess respondents’
comprehension of risk concepts and to
inform the CPSC on the feasibility of
developing a future survey instrument
that will identify the best methods or
approaches to communicate risk
concepts related to consumer products.
Alberta E. Mills,
Secretary, Consumer Product Safety
Commission.
[FR Doc. 2020–06514 Filed 3–27–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6355–01–P
18:05 Mar 27, 2020
Department of the Air Force
Notice of Intent To Prepare a
Legislative Environmental Impact
Statement and Notice of Cancellation
of Scoping Meetings for the Proposed
Extension of the Military Land
Withdrawal at Barry M. Goldwater
Range, Arizona
Department of the Air Force
and United States Marine Corps,
Department of Defense.
ACTION: Amended notice of intent.
AGENCY:
The United States Air Force
(USAF) (co-lead agency), in
coordination with the United States
Marine Corps (USMC) (co-lead agency),
is issuing this amended notice to advise
the public of the continuing intent to
prepare a Legislative Environmental
Impact Statement (LEIS) for the
proposed extension of the Barry M.
Goldwater Range (BMGR) land
withdrawal and reservation in Arizona.
The LEIS will also address a proposal to
withdrawal approximately 2,366 acres
of additional public land adjacent to
Gila Bend Air Force Auxiliary Airfield
to enhance the security and safety of
flight operations at the airfield.
However, as a direct result of the
National Emergency declared by the
President on Friday, March 13, 2020, in
response to the coronavirus (COVID–19)
pandemic in the United States and the
Center for Disease Control’s
recommendations for social distancing
SUMMARY:
Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44
U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires federal
agencies to provide a 60-day notice in
the Federal Register concerning each
proposed collection of information
before submitting the collection to OMB
for approval. On December 30, 2019, the
CPSC published a notice in the Federal
Register announcing the agency’s intent
to seek approval of this collection of
information (84 FR 71902). The CPSC
received no comments in response to
that notice. Therefore, by publication of
this notice, the CPSC announces that it
has submitted to the OMB a request for
approval of this collection of
information.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
and avoiding large public gatherings,
the Air Force is now canceling five
public scoping meetings between April
9, 2020 and April 30, 2020. In lieu of the
public scoping meetings, the Air Force
will use the alternative means set forth
below to inform the public and
stakeholders and to obtain input for
scoping the proposed action.
Information on the BMGR
land withdrawal and the LEIS process
can be accessed at the project website at
www.barry-m-goldwater-leis.com. The
project website can also be used to
submit comments. In the alternative,
interested persons may submit written
comments by mail or email. For those
who do not have ready access to a
computer or the internet, the scopingrelated materials posted to the website
will be made available upon request by
mail or phone. Inquiries, requests for
scoping-related materials, and
comments regarding the USAF/USMC
proposal may be submitted by mail to
BMGR Land Withdrawal LEIS, P.O. Box
2324, Phoenix, AZ 85003, or email to
BMGR_LEIS@jacobs.com, or by phone to
Mr. Jon Haliscak at 210–395–0615.
Written scoping comments will be
accepted at any time during the
environmental impact analysis process
up until the public release of the Draft
EIS. However, to ensure the Air Force
and Marine Corps have sufficient time
to consider public input in the
preparation of the Draft LEIS, scoping
comments must be submitted to the
website or mailed to one of the
ADDRESSES:
E:\FR\FM\30MRN1.SGM
30MRN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 61 (Monday, March 30, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17543-17544]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-06514]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION
[Docket No. CPSC-2019-0035]
Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB
Review; Comment Request; Consumer Product Risk Reduction Valuation
Study: Cognitive Interviews & Focus Groups
AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: As required under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA),
the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) announces that CPSC has
submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a new proposed
collection of information by the agency to conduct cognitive interviews
and focus groups that will assess consumer comprehension of risk
associated with consumer products. On December 30, 2019, the CPSC
published a notice in the Federal Register announcing the agency's
intent to seek approval of this collection of information. The CPSC
received no comments in response to that notice. Therefore, by
publication of this notice, the CPSC announces that it has submitted to
the OMB a request for approval of this collection of information.
DATES: Submit written or electronic comments on the collection of
information by May 29, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments about this request by email:
[email protected] or fax: 202-395-6881. Comments by mail
should be sent to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Attn: OMB Desk Officer for the CPSC, Office of Management and Budget,
Room 10235, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503. In addition,
written comments that are sent to OMB also should be submitted
electronically at https://www.regulations.gov, under Docket No. CPSC-
2019-0035.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bretford Griffin, Consumer Product
Safety Commission, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814; (301)
504-7037, or by email to: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), federal
agencies must obtain approval from OMB for each collection of
information they conduct or sponsor. ``Collection of information'' is
defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes cognitive
interviews and focus groups.
A. Consumer Product Risk Reduction Valuation Study
CPSC is authorized under section 5(a) of the Consumer Product
Safety Act (CPSA), 15 U.S.C. 2054(a), to conduct studies and
investigations relating to the causes and prevention of deaths,
accidents, injuries, illnesses, other health impairments, and economic
losses associated with consumer products. Section 5(b) of the CPSA, 15
U.S.C. 2054(b), further provides that CPSC may conduct research,
studies, and investigations on the safety of consumer products or test
consumer products and develop product safety test methods and testing
devices.
CPSC issues regulations to reduce the risk of fatal injuries or
illnesses associated with the use of consumer products. To value
reductions in the risk of fatalities, CPSC and other federal agencies
rely on estimates of the value per statistical life (VSL), which are
derived from research on individuals' willingness to pay (WTP),
consistent with the conceptual framework for benefit-cost analysis.
Most of the studies on which these estimates are based calculate WTP by
evaluating tradeoffs made by workers in risky occupations, and thus,
concentrate on certain populations (working-age males). However, the
type of risks and populations that are addressed by CPSC regulations
often involve children. Although there are a few completed studies that
address the value of risk reductions that accrue to children, the
available literature is limited and largely unrelated to the types of
risks addressed by CPSC rulemakings.\1\ Due to the absence of children
from labor markets and the lack of observable market data, the majority
of the studies employ stated preference methods. That method asks
individuals, usually through questionnaires, the economic value that
they attach to a perceived risk, based on constructed or hypothetical
markets. Although the existing studies suggest
[[Page 17544]]
higher values for reducing risks to children than reductions to adults,
they do not adequately determine the extent to which values for fatal
risk reductions differ for adults versus children for risks associated
with consumer products, nor do they adequately explain the level of
respondent comprehension of relevant risk concepts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See, e.g., Alberini, A. and M. [Scaron][ccaron]asn[yacute].
2011. Context and the VSL: Evidence from a Stated Preference Study
in Italy and Czech Republic. Environmental and Resource Economics,
49(4): 511-538; Gerking, S., M. Dickie, and M. Veronesi. 2014.
Valuation of Human Health: An Integrated Model of WTP for Mortality
and Morbidity Risk Reductions. Journal of Environmental Economics
and Management, 68(1): 20-45; Hammitt, J.K. and K. Haninger. 2010.
Valuing Fatal Risk to Children and Adults: Effects of Disease,
Latency and Risk Aversion. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 40: 57-
83; Hammitt, J.K. and D. Herrera. 2017. Peeling Back the Onion:
Using Latent Class Analysis to Uncover Heterogeneous Responses to
Stated Preference Surveys. Journal of Environmental Economics and
Management, in press.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CPSC seeks to conduct additional research to evaluate whether
reductions in consumer product-related risks are valued differently
when the beneficiary of the reduction is a child versus an adult. To
assess comprehension of risk concepts, CPSC intends to conduct
qualitative pretesting, in the form of cognitive interviews and focus
groups, based on best practices used in stated-preference study design.
CPSC will conduct an initial set of eight cognitive interviews aimed
specifically at topics related to risk communication and risk
comprehension from homeowners with at least one child under the age of
12. Based on the results of the initial cognitive interviews, CPSC will
inform OMB of any changes that are made for conducting a subsequent set
of focus groups. Those focus groups will consist of 40 respondents and
16 additional cognitive interviews that will query the respondents on
fatal household risks related to consumer products. The interviews and
focus groups are designed to assess respondents' comprehension of risk
concepts and to inform the CPSC on the feasibility of developing a
future survey instrument that will identify the best methods or
approaches to communicate risk concepts related to consumer products.
B. Burden Hours
The estimated annual burden hours are as follows:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated
Number of burden per Total burden
Activity responses respondent (hours)
(hours)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cognitive Interviews I (Risk Communication and Comprehension)... 8 1.5 12
Focus Group Sessions (Household Risks and Consumer Products).... 40 2 80
Cognitive Interviews II (Household Risks and Consumer Products). 16 1.5 24
-----------------------------------------------
Total....................................................... .............. .............. 116
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We estimate the total annual dollar value of this collection to be
$4,265. This estimate is based on an average of $36.77/hr.
compensation, including benefits, from the National Compensation Survey
published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (U.S. Bureau of Labor
Statistics, ``Employer Costs for Employee Compensation by ownership,''
Dec. 2018, Table 1, total compensation for civilian workers: https://www.bls.gov/ncs/). The total cost to the federal government for the
contract to design and conduct the proposed survey is $117,458.
C. Submission to OMB
Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires
federal agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register
concerning each proposed collection of information before submitting
the collection to OMB for approval. On December 30, 2019, the CPSC
published a notice in the Federal Register announcing the agency's
intent to seek approval of this collection of information (84 FR
71902). The CPSC received no comments in response to that notice.
Therefore, by publication of this notice, the CPSC announces that it
has submitted to the OMB a request for approval of this collection of
information.
Alberta E. Mills,
Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission.
[FR Doc. 2020-06514 Filed 3-27-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6355-01-P
