81 FR 55449 - Collection of Information; Proposed Extension of Approval; Comment Request-Publicly Available Consumer Product Safety Information Database
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 161 (August 19, 2016)
Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 161 (August 19, 2016)
| Page Range | 55449-55454 | |
| FR Document | 2016-19811 |
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 161 (Friday, August 19, 2016)] [Notices] [Pages 55449-55454] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2016-19811] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 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: Submit written or electronic comments on the collection of information by October 18, 2016. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. CPSC-2010- 0041, by any of the following methods: 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: http://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. Written Submissions: Submit written submissions by mail/hand delivery/courier 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: http://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 [[Page 55450]] 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: http://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: [email protected]. 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. The Commission announced that a proposed collection of information in conjunction with the Database, called the Publicly Available Consumer Product Safety Information Database, had been submitted to OMB for review and clearance under 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520 in a proposed rule published on May 24, 2010 (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 most recent extension of approval on December 2, 2013 will expire on December 31, 2016. Accordingly, 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. The Database information collection has four components: 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 CPSC) 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 after the CPSC transmits the report to the manufacturer or private labeler identified in the report. Manufacturer 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, by email, by mail, or by fax. Additionally, any person or entity reviewing a report of harm or manufacturer comment, either before or after publication in the Database, may request that the report or comment, or portions of the report or comment, be excluded from the Database because it contains materially inaccurate information. Such a request may be made by manufacturers using the business portal, by email, mail or fax, and may be submitted by anyone else by email, mail, or fax. Branding Information: Using the business portal, registered businesses may voluntarily submit branding information to assist CPSC in correctly and timely routing reports of harm involving their products to them. Brand names may be licensed to another entity for use in labeling consumer products manufactured by that entity. CPSC's understanding of licensing arrangements for consumer products ensures 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, a business must attest that the company's income level and the number of units of the covered product manufactured for which relief is sought both fall within the statutory limits to receive relief from third party testing. C. Estimated Burden 1. Estimated Annual Burden for Respondents We estimate the burden of this collection of information as follows: 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 6,582 1.03 6,790 12 1,358 through website................ Reports of Harm--submitted by 2,632 1.01 2,643 10 441 phone.......................... Reports of Harm--submitted by 780 6.67 5,206 20 1,735 mail, email, fax............... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [[Page 55451]] Total....................... 9,994 .............. 14,639 .............. 3,534 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \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 532 6.23 3,317 117 6,468 through Web site............... Manufacturer Comments--submitted 283 1.22 346 147 848 by mail, email, fax............ Requests to Treat Information as 12 1.08 13 42 9 Confidential--submitted through Web site....................... Requests to Treat Information as 0 n/a 0 72 0 Confidential--submitted by mail, email, fax............... Requests to Treat Information as 131 1.82 238 165 655 Materially Inaccurate-- submitted through Web site..... Requests to Treat Information as 79 1.06 84 195 273 Materially Inaccurate-- submitted by mail, email, fax.. Voluntary Brand Identification.. 829 1.48 1,228 10 205 Small Batch Manufacturer 2,208 1 2,208 10 368 Identification................. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total....................... 4,074 .............. 7,434 .............. 8,826 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Based on the data set forth in Tables 1 and 2 above, the annual reporting cost is estimated to be $719,381. 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 2015. We assume that the number of responses and respondents will be similar in future years. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ Frequency of response is calculated by dividing the number of responses by the number of respondents. \2\ Numbers have been rounded. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 (1,358 hours + 441 hours + 1,735 hours = 3,534 hours) by an estimated total compensation for all workers in private industry of $32.06 per hour,\3\ which results in an estimated cost of $113,300 (3,534 hours x $32.06 per hour = $113,300). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \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, June 2016 (data extracted on 06/23/2016 from http://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. We 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 2015; and then we selected several businesses from each group to contact. The first group we contacted consisted of businesses that submitted 50 or more comments in FY 2015, accounting for 31 percent of all general comments received. The second group we contacted included businesses that submitted six to 49 comments, accounting for 39 percent of all general comments received. The last group contacted included businesses that submitted no more than five comments, accounting for 30 percent of all general comments received.\4\ We asked each company contacted how long it typically takes to research, compose, and enter a comment, a claim of materially inaccurate information, or a confidential information claim. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \4\ In the last group one company was excluded as an outlier. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- To estimate the burden associated with submitting a general comment through the business portal regarding a report of harm, 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 117 minutes based on the data in Table 3 (((15 minutes + 45 minutes + 30 minutes + 15 minutes)/4 companies) * .31 + ((105 minutes + 45 minutes + 150 minutes + 15 minutes)/4 companies) * .39 + ((240 minutes + 60 minutes + 480 minutes)/3 companies) * .30 = 117 minutes). [[Page 55452]] Table 3--Estimated Burden To Enter a General Comment in the Database ------------------------------------------------------------------------ General Group Company comments (minutes) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Group 1................................ A 15 (>=50 comments).................... B 45 C 30 D 15 Group 2................................ A 105 (6-49 comments).................... B 45 C 150 D 15 Group 3................................ A 240 (>=5 comments)..................... B 60 C 480 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Registered businesses generally submit comments through our Web site. Unregistered businesses submit comments by mail, email, or fax. We estimate that for unregistered businesses, submitting comments 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 (117 minutes + 30 minutes = 147 minutes). The submission of a claim of materially inaccurate information is a relatively rare event for all respondents. Accordingly, we averaged all responses together. Eight of the businesses contacted had submitted claims of materially inaccurate information. We found that the average time to submit a claim that a report of harm contains a material inaccuracy is 165 minutes ((30 minutes + 90 minutes + 45 minutes + 90 minutes + 60 minutes + 660 minutes + 45 minutes + 300 minutes)/8 companies = 165 minutes). Registered businesses generally submit claims through the business portal. Unregistered businesses submit claims by mail, email, or fax. We estimate that submitting claims by mail, email, or fax takes a little longer because we often must ask the businesses to amend their submission 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 (165 minutes + 30 minutes = 195 minutes). The submission of a claim of confidential information is a relatively rare event for all respondents; accordingly, we averaged all responses together. Five of the businesses contacted had submitted claims of confidential information. We found that the average time to submit a claim that a report of harm contains confidential information is 42 minutes ((45 minutes + 15 minutes + 60 minutes + 30 minutes + 60 minutes)/5 companies = 42 minutes). Registered businesses generally submit confidential information claims through the business portal. Unregistered businesses submit confidential information 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 submission to include the required certifications. Thus, 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 (42 minutes + 30 minutes = 72 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 (8,826 hours) by an estimated total compensation for a manager or professional in goods- producing industries of $68.67 per hour,\5\ which results in an estimated cost of $606,081 (8,826 hours x $68.67 per hour = $606,081). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \5\ 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, June 2016 (data extracted on 06/23/2016 from http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.t09.htm. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Therefore, the total estimated annual cost to respondents is $719,381 ($113,300 burden for reports of harm + $606,081 burden for manufacturer submissions = $719,381). 2. Estimated Annual Burden on Government We estimate the annualized cost to the CPSC to be $954,531. 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 two data entry contracts. Tasks related to these contracts include clerical coding of the report, such as [[Page 55453]] identifying the type of consumer product reported and the appropriate associated hazard, as well as performing quality control on the data in the report. Contractor A spends an estimated 5,267 hours per year performing these tasks. With an hourly rate of $33.31 for contractor services, the annual cost to the government of contract A is $175,444. Contractor B spends an estimated 2,539 hours per year performing these tasks. With an hourly rate of $58.09 for contractor services, the annual cost to the government of contract B is $147,491. The Reports of Harm category also includes sending consent requests for reports when necessary, processing that consent when received, determining whether a product is out of CPSC's jurisdiction, and confirming 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: Table 4--Estimated Costs for Reports of Harm Task ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Number of Total Grade level hours compensation Total annual (annual) per hour cost ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Contract A...................................................... 5,267 $33.31 $175,444 Contract B...................................................... 2,539 58.09 147,491 7............................................................... 200 34.78 6,956 9............................................................... 300 42.69 12,807 12.............................................................. 5,528 61.91 342,238 13.............................................................. 428 73.37 31,402 14.............................................................. 1,068 86.99 92,905 ----------------------------------------------- Total....................................................... 15,330 .............. 809,243 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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. Table 5--Estimated Costs for MII Claims Task ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Number of Total Grade level hours compensation Total annual (annual) per hour cost ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12.............................................................. 275 $61.91 $17,025 13.............................................................. 167 73.37 12,253 14.............................................................. 323 86.99 28,098 15.............................................................. 50 101.99 5,100 SES............................................................. 50 109.97 5,499 ----------------------------------------------- Total....................................................... 865 .............. 67,975.00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Manufacturer Comments: The Comments category includes reviewing and accepting or rejecting comments. Table 6--Estimated Costs for Manufacturer Comments Task ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Number of Total Grade level hours compensation Total annual (annual) per hour cost ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12.............................................................. 62 $61.91 $3,838 13.............................................................. 109 73.37 7,997 ----------------------------------------------- Total....................................................... 171 .............. 11,835 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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. [[Page 55454]] Table 7--Estimated Costs for Small Batch Task ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Number of Total Grade level hours compensation Total annual (annual) per hour cost ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15.............................................................. 642 $101.99 $65,478 ----------------------------------------------- Total....................................................... 642 .............. $65,478 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- We estimate the annualized cost to the CPSC of $954,531 by adding the four categories of work related to the Database summarized in Tables 4 through 7 (Reports of Harm ($809,243) + MII Claims ($67,975) + Manufacturer Comments ($11,835) + Small Batch Identification ($65,478) = $954,531). This information collection renewal request based on an estimated 12,360 burden hours per year for the Database is a decrease of 7,485 hours since this collection of information was last approved by OMB in 2013. The decrease in burden is due primarily to the fact that the number of incoming reports of harm has decreased, and the number of claims based on those reports has decreased as well. While comments did not decline significantly, they did shift to the more efficient online submissions. We note a large increase in small batch manufacturer activity, which has been rising steadily for years. However, this increase was not large enough to offset the decreases in other areas. 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, 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: February 16, 2016. Todd A. Stevenson, Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission. [FR Doc. 2016-19811 Filed 8-18-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6355-01-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2016 / Notices 55449
8410–01–279–7736—Skirt, Gabardine, Contracting Activity: General Services CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY
Lined, Marine Corps, Women’s, Blue, Administration, New York, NY COMMISSION
10S NSN(s)—Product Name(s):
8410–01–279–7737—Skirt, Gabardine, [Docket No. CPSC–2010–0041]
7045–01–599–5322—Glare Shield for
Lined, Marine Corps, Women’s, Blue,
10R iPhone Collection of Information; Proposed
8410–01–279–7738—Skirt, Gabardine, 7045–01–599–5271—Glare Shield for Extension of Approval; Comment
Lined, Marine Corps, Women’s, Blue, Blackberry Bold Request—Publicly Available Consumer
10L 7045–01–599–5273—Glare Shield for
Product Safety Information Database
8410–01–279–7739—Skirt, Gabardine, Blackberry Storm2
Lined, Marine Corps, Women’s, Blue, 7045–01–599–5290—Glare Shield for AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety
12S Blackberry Curve2 Commission.
8410–01–279–7740—Skirt, Gabardine, 7045–01–599–5275—Universal PDA Glare
Lined, Marine Corps, Women’s, Blue, ACTION: Notice.
Shield
12R
8410–01–279–7741—Skirt, Gabardine,
7045–01–599–5287—Privacy Shield for SUMMARY: As required by the Paperwork
Lined, Marine Corps, Women’s, Blue, iPhone Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C.
12L 7045–01–599–5276—Privacy Shield for Chapter 35), the Consumer Product
8410–01–279–7742—Skirt, Gabardine, Blackberry Bold Safety Commission (CPSC or
Lined, Marine Corps, Women’s, Blue, 7045–01–599–5278—Privacy Shield for Commission) requests comments on a
14S Blackberry Storm2 proposed extension of approval of a
8410–01–279–7743—Skirt, Gabardine, 7045–01–599–5285—Privacy Shield for collection of information for the
Lined, Marine Corps, Women’s, Blue, Blackberry Curve2 Publicly Available Consumer Product
14R 7045–01–599–5282—Privacy Shield for
8410–01–279–7744—Skirt, Gabardine,
Safety Information Database. The
PDA, Universal Commission will consider all comments
Lined, Marine Corps, Women’s, Blue,
Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Wiscraft, received in response to this notice
14L
8410–01–279–7745—Skirt, Gabardine, Inc., Milwaukee, WI before requesting an extension of
Lined, Marine Corps, Women’s, Blue, Contracting Activity: General Services approval of this collection of
16S Administration, New York, NY information from the Office of
8410–01–279–7746—Skirt, Gabardine, NSN(s)—Product Name(s): Management and Budget (OMB).
Lined, Marine Corps, Women’s, Blue,
7110–00–194–1611—Rotary Drafting DATES: Submit written or electronic
16R
8410–01–279–7747—Skirt, Gabardine, Stool—Faux Leather comments on the collection of
Lined, Marine Corps, Women’s, Blue, 7110–00–281–4469—Rotary Drafting information by October 18, 2016.
16L Stool—Upholstered ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
8410–01–279–7748—Skirt, Gabardine, Contracting Activity: General Services identified by Docket No. CPSC–2010–
Lined, Marine Corps, Women’s, Blue, Administration, Philadelphia, PA
0041, by any of the following methods:
18S NSN(s)—Product Name(s):
8410–01–279–7749—Skirt, Gabardine, You may submit comments, identified
7210–00–NIB–0160—Pillow, Medical, by Docket No. CPSC–2010–0041, by any
Lined, Marine Corps, Women’s, Blue,
White, 26″ x 20″ of the following methods:
18R
8410–01–279–7750—Skirt, Gabardine, 7210–00–NIB–0161—Pillow, Medical, Electronic Submissions: Submit
Lined, Marine Corps, Women’s, Blue, Blue, 26″ x 20″ electronic comments to the Federal
18L 7210–00–NIB–0162—Pillow, Bed, Flame eRulemaking Portal at: http://
8410–01–279–7751—Skirt, Gabardine, Resistant, Pink, 26″ x 20″ www.regulations.gov. Follow the
Lined, Marine Corps, Women’s, Blue, Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Blind instructions for submitting comments.
20S Industries & Services of Maryland,
8410–01–279–7752—Skirt, Gabardine,
The Commission does not accept
Baltimore, MD comments submitted by electronic mail
Lined, Marine Corps, Women’s, Blue, Contracting Activity: Department of Veterans
20R (email), except through
Affairs
8410–01–279–7753—Skirt, Gabardine, www.regulations.gov. The Commission
Lined, Marine Corps, Women’s, Blue, NSN(s)—Product Name(s): encourages you to submit electronic
20L 5970–01–245–7042—Tape, Electrical comments by using the Federal
Contracting Activity: Defense Logistics Insulation, Black, 1″ W x 108 ft eRulemaking Portal, as described above.
Agency Troop Support Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Cincinnati Written Submissions: Submit written
NSN(s)—Product Name(s): Association for the Blind, Cincinnati, OH submissions by mail/hand delivery/
7520–01–385–7362—Pencil, Mechanical, Blind Industries & Services of Maryland, courier to: Office of the Secretary,
Side Action, Green Barrel, 0.7 mm Baltimore, MD
7520–01–354–2305—Pencil, Mechanical, Consumer Product Safety Commission,
NSN(s)—Product Name(s): Room 820, 4330 East West Highway,
Push Action, Red Barrel and Lead, Extra
Bold Point (1.1 mm) 5970–01–560–5355—Tape, Insulation, Bethesda, MD 20814; telephone (301)
Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: San Antonio Electrical, High Voltage, Black, 2″ x 108′ 504–7923.
Lighthouse for the Blind, San Antonio, Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Blind Instructions: All submissions received
TX Industries & Services of Maryland, must include the agency name and
Contracting Activity: General Services Baltimore, MD docket number for this notice. All
Administration, New York, NY Contracting Activity: Defense Logistics comments received may be posted
NSN(s)—Product Name(s): Agency Aviation without change, including any personal
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
7510–01–443–2121—Toner, Cartridges, identifiers, contact information, or other
New Barry S. Lineback,
Director, Business Operations.
personal information provided, to:
7510–00–NIB–0633—Skilcraft Toner
Cartridge http://www.regulations.gov. Do not
[FR Doc. 2016–19842 Filed 8–18–16; 8:45 am]
7510–00–NIB–0642—Skilcraft Toner submit confidential business
BILLING CODE 6353–01–P information, trade secret information, or
Cartridge
Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Alabama other sensitive or protected information
Industries for the Blind, Talladega, AL that you do not want to be available to
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Aug 18, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19AUN1.SGM 19AUN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_55610/page/1.svg)
![55454 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2016 / Notices
TABLE 7—ESTIMATED COSTS FOR SMALL BATCH TASK
Number of Total Total annual
Grade level hours compensation cost
(annual) per hour
15 ................................................................................................................................................. 642 $101.99 $65,478
Total ...................................................................................................................................... 642 ........................ $65,478
We estimate the annualized cost to Dated: February 16, 2016. context and provide any necessary
the CPSC of $954,531 by adding the four Todd A. Stevenson, background information. Written
categories of work related to the Secretary, Consumer Product Safety statements can be submitted to the
Database summarized in Tables 4 Commission. Designated Federal Officer (DFO) at the
through 7 (Reports of Harm ($809,243) [FR Doc. 2016–19811 Filed 8–18–16; 8:45 am] Air Force address detailed below at any
+ MII Claims ($67,975) + Manufacturer BILLING CODE 6355–01–P time. However, if a written statement is
Comments ($11,835) + Small Batch not received at least 10 calendar days
Identification ($65,478) = $954,531). before the first day of the meeting which
This information collection renewal DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE is the subject of this notice, then it may
request based on an estimated 12,360 not be provided to or considered by the
Department of the Air Force BoV until its next open meeting. The
burden hours per year for the Database
is a decrease of 7,485 hours since this Board of Visitors of the U.S. Air Force DFO will review all timely submissions
collection of information was last Academy; Notice of Meeting with the BoV Chairman and ensure they
approved by OMB in 2013. The decrease are provided to members of the BoV
AGENCY: U.S. Air Force Academy Board before the meeting that is the subject of
in burden is due primarily to the fact of Visitors, Department of Defense.
that the number of incoming reports of this notice. If after review of timely
ACTION: Meeting notice. submitted written comments and the
harm has decreased, and the number of
claims based on those reports has SUMMARY: In accordance with 10 U.S.C. BoV Chairman and DFO deem
decreased as well. While comments did Section 9355, the U.S. Air Force appropriate, they may choose to invite
not decline significantly, they did shift Academy (USAFA) Board of Visitors the submitter of the written comments
to the more efficient online (BoV) will hold a meeting at the Center to orally present the issue during an
submissions. We note a large increase in for Character and Leadership open portion of the BoV meeting that is
small batch manufacturer activity, Development Building, U.S. Air Force the subject of this notice. Members of
which has been rising steadily for years. Academy, Colorado Springs, CO on Sept the BoV may also petition the Chairman
However, this increase was not large 7 & 8, 2016. On Wednesday, Sept 7, the to allow specific personnel to make oral
enough to offset the decreases in other meeting will begin at 1300 and conclude presentations before the BoV. In
areas. at 1600. On Thursday, Sept 8, the accordance with 41 CFR Section 102–
meeting will begin at 8:00 a.m. and 3.140(d), any oral presentations before
D. Request for Comments conclude at 1515. The purpose of this the BoV shall be in accordance with
meeting is to review morale and agency guidelines provided pursuant to
The Commission solicits written discipline, social climate, curriculum, a written invitation and this paragraph.
comments from all interested persons instruction, infrastructure, fiscal affairs, Direct questioning of BoV members or
about the proposed collection of academic methods, and other matters meeting participants by the public is not
information. The Commission relating to the Academy. Specific topics
permitted except with the approval of
specifically solicits information relevant for this meeting include a
the DFO and Chairman. For the benefit
to the following topics: Superintendent’s Update; USAFA Non-
Profits Update; Religious Respect of the public, rosters that list the names
• Whether the collection of of BoV members and any releasable
information described above is Update; USAFA Academics Update;
USAFA’s Climate Assessment Survey materials presented during the open
necessary for the proper performance of portions of this BoV meeting shall be
the Commission’s functions, including Results. Public attendance at this
USAFA BoV meeting shall be made available upon request.
whether the information would have
accommodated on a first-come, first- FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
practical utility;
served basis up to the reasonable and additional information or to attend this
• Whether the estimated burden of safe capacity of the meeting room. In BoV meeting, contact Major James
the proposed collection of information addition, any member of the public Kuchta, Accessions and Training
is accurate; wishing to provide input to the USAFA Division, AF/A1PT, 1040 Air Force
• Whether the quality, utility, and BoV should submit a written statement Pentagon, Washington, DC 20330, (703)
clarity of the information to be collected in accordance with 41 CFR Section 102–
695–4066, James.L.Kuchta.mil@
could be enhanced; and 3.140(c) and section 10(a)(3) of the
mail.mil.
Federal Advisory Committee Act and
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
• Whether the burden imposed by the the procedures described in this Henry Williams,
collection of information could be paragraph. Written statements must Acting Air Force Federal Register Officer.
minimized by use of automated, address the following details: The issue, [FR Doc. 2016–19783 Filed 8–18–16; 8:45 am]
electronic or other technological discussion, and a recommended course
collection techniques, or other forms of of action. Supporting documentation BILLING CODE 5001–10–P
information technology. may also be included as needed to
establish the appropriate historical
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Aug 18, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\19AUN1.SGM 19AUN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_55610/page/6.svg)
Document Created: 2016-08-19 01:35:20
Document Modified: 2016-08-19 01:35:20
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Notices | |
| Action | Notice. | |
| Dates | Submit written or electronic comments on the collection of information by October 18, 2016. | |
| FR Citation | 81 FR 55449 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR