Department of Health and Human Services November 22, 2013 – Federal Register Recent Federal Regulation Documents

Under the provisions of Section 3507(a)(1)(D) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the National Institutes of Health (NIH), has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a request for review and approval of the information collection listed below. This proposed information collection was previously published in the Federal Register on May 23, 2013, Volume 78, p. 30930 and allowed 60-days for public comment. One public comment was received on May 24, 2013 stating that the agency should spend more money on funding prevention research. An email response was sent on May 28, 2013 stating, ``Your comments were received and they will be taken into consideration.'' The purpose of this notice is to allow an additional 30 days for public comment. The National Cancer Institute (NCI), National Institutes of Health, may not conduct or sponsor, and the respondent is not required to respond to, an information collection that has been extended, revised, or implemented on or after October 1, 1995, unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. Direct Comments to OMB: Written comments and/or suggestions regarding the item(s) contained in this notice, especially regarding the estimated public burden and associated response time, should be directed to the: Office of Management and Budget, Office of Regulatory Affairs, OIRA_submission@omb.eop.gov or by fax to 202-395-6974, Attention: NIH Desk Officer.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is announcing an opportunity for the public to comment on CMS' intention to collect information from the public. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA), federal agencies are required to publish notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information (including each proposed extension or reinstatement of an existing collection of information) and to allow 60 days for public comment on the proposed action. Interested persons are invited to send comments regarding our burden estimates or any other aspect of this collection of information, including any of the following subjects: (1) The necessity and utility of the proposed information collection for the proper performance of the agency's functions; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology to minimize the information collection burden.

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is conducting a public review of the draft skin notations and supporting technical documents entitled, Skin Notations Profiles, for 25 chemicals. NIOSH is requesting technical reviews of the draft Skin Notation Profiles. This review is consistent with the process used for the publication of the first 20 Skin Notation Profiles, Docket Number NIOSH 153-A [https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docket/archive/docket153A.html]. To facilitate the review of these documents, NIOSH requests that the following questions be taken into consideration for each Skin Notation Profile: 1. Does this document clearly outline the systemic health hazards associated with exposures of the skin to the chemical? If not, what specific information is missing from the document? 2. If the SYS or SYS (FATAL) notations are assigned, are the rationale and logic behind the assignment clear? If not assigned, is the logic clear why it was not (e.g., insufficient data, no identified health hazard)? 3. Does this document clearly outline the direct (localized) health hazards associated with exposures of the skin to the chemical? If not, what specific information is missing from the document? 4. If the DIR, DIR (IRR), or DIR (COR) notations are assigned, are the rationale and logic behind the assignment clear? If not assigned, is the logic clear why it was not (e.g., insufficient data, no identified health hazard)? 5. Does this document clearly outline the immune-mediated responses (allergic response) health hazards associated with exposures of the skin to the chemical? If not, what specific information is missing from the document? 6. If the SEN notation is assigned, are the rationale and logic behind the assignment clear? If not assigned, is the logic clear why it was not (e.g., insufficient data, no identified health hazard)? 7. If the ID (SK) or SK were assigned, are the rationale and logic outlined within the document? 8. Are the conclusions supported by the data? 9. Are the tables clear and appropriate? 10. Is the document organized appropriately? If not, what improvements are needed? 11. Are you aware of any scientific data reported in governmental publications, databases, peer-reviewed journals, or other sources that should be included within this document?

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 Office of Extramural Research (OER), the National Institutes of Health (NIH) will publish periodic summaries of proposed projects to be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval. Written comments and/or suggestions from the public and affected agencies are invited on one or more of the following points: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the function of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) 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; (3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. To submit comments in writing, request more information on the proposed project, or to obtain a copy of the data collection plans and instruments, contact Dr. Sherry Mills, Director, Office of Extramural Programs, OER, NIH, 6705 Rockledge Drive, Suite 350, Bethesda, MD 20892, or call non-toll-free number (301) 435-2729, or Email your request, including your address to: OEPMailbox@mail.nih.gov. Comments regarding this information collection are best assured of having their full effect if received within 60-days of the date of this publication. Proposed Collection: Generic Clearance for Surveys of Customers and Partners of the Office of Extramural Research of the National Institutes of HealthExtension0925-0627Office of the Director (OD), Office of Extramural Research (OER), Office of Extramural Programs (OEP), National Institutes of Health (NIH). Need and Use of Information Collection: OER develops, coordinates the implementation of, and evaluates NIH-wide policies and procedures for the award of extramural funds. To move forward with our initiatives to ensure success in accomplishing the NIH mission, input from partners and customers is essential. Quality management principles have been integrated into OER's culture and these surveys will provide customer satisfaction input on various elements of OER's business processes. The approximately 14 (10 quantitative and 4 qualitative) customer satisfaction surveys that will be conducted under this generic clearance will gather and measure customer and partner satisfaction with OER processes and operations. The data collected from these surveys will provide the feedback to track and gauge satisfaction with NIH's statutorily mandated operations and processes. OER/OD/NIH will present data and outcomes from these surveys to inform the NIH staff, officers, leadership, advisory committees, and other decision-making bodies as appropriate. Based on feedback from these stakeholders, OER/ OD/NIH will formulate improvement plans and take action when necessary. OMB approval is requested for 3 years. There are no costs to respondents other than their time. The total estimated annualized burden hours are 2,485.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is withdrawing approval of three new animal drug applications (NADAs) for roxarsone or carbarsone Type A medicated articles at the sponsor's request because the products are no longer manufactured or marketed.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the termination of the Veterinary Medicine Advisory Committee. This document removes the Veterinary Advisory Committee from the Agency's list of standing advisory committees.