Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 12, 2009 / Notices 40599 

specialized products that include 

aircraft and aerospace insulation, 

battery separators, and high efficiency 

filters. Glass wool (respirable size) is 

currently listed in the 11th RoC as 

reasonably anticipated to be a human 

carcinogen. 

As part of the review process for 

candidate substances for the 12th RoC 

(available at http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/go/ 

15208), the RoC Center convened a 

nine-member expert panel of 

independent scientists to evaluate glass 

wool fibers for possible listing in the 

12th RoC. An additional, non-voting, 

scientist was also in attendance to 

respond to technical questions from the 

panel about glass wool. The expert 

panel met in a public forum at the 

Sheraton Chapel Hill Hotel, Chapel Hill, 

North Carolina on June 9–10, 2009. The 

panel was charged to peer review the 

draft background document for glass 

wool fibers and, once this task was 

completed, to make a recommendation 

on the listing status of glass wool fibers 

in the 12th RoC and to provide a 

scientific justification for that 

recommendation. Details about the 

meeting, including public comments 

received and the expert panel reports, 

are available on the RoC Web site 

(http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/go/29682). The 

Glass Wool Fibers Expert Panel Report 

contains two parts: Part A has the peer 

review comments on the draft 

background document and part B has 

the recommendation on listing status 

and its scientific justification. 

The expert panel decided to separate 

glass wool fibers into two categories for 

purposes of evaluating for the RoC. 

They recommended that specialpurpose glass fibers (physical 

characteristics: longer, thinner, less 

soluble fibers, e.g., ≥ 15 μm length with 

a kdiss of ≤100 ng/cm2/h) be listed as 

reasonably anticipated to be a human 

carcinogen in the 12th RoC. The panel 

recommended that glass wool fibers, 

with the exception of special fibers of 

concern (characterized above), not be 

listed in the 12th RoC either as known 

to be a human carcinogen or reasonably 

anticipated to be a human carcinogen. 

Request for Comments 

The RoC Center invites written public 

comments on the expert panel’s two 

recommendations on the listing status 

for glass wool fibers and the scientific 

justification for those recommendations. 

The NTP is also particularly interested 

in comments on the expert panel’s 

decision to separate glass wool fibers 

into two categories for purposes of 

listing in the RoC evaluation and on the 

set of physical characteristics that the 

panel used to classify the fibers into two 

categories. All comments received will 

be posted on the RoC Web site and 

identified by the submitters and, if 

applicable, their affiliation and/or 

sponsoring organization. Persons 

submitting written comments are asked 

to include their name and contact 

information (affiliation, mailing address, 

telephone and facsimile numbers, email, and sponsoring organization, if 

any) and send them to Dr. Lunn (see 

‘‘ADDRESSES’’ above). The deadline for 

submission of written comments is 

September 28, 2009. 

Next Steps 

The RoC Center is in the process of 

finalizing the background document for 

glass wool fibers based upon the expert 

panel’s peer review comments and the 

public comments received on the draft 

background document. Persons can 

register free-of-charge with the NTP 

listserve (http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/go/ 

231) to receive notification when the 

final background document is posted on 

the RoC Web site. As part of the RoC 

review process, two government groups 

will also conduct reviews of glass wool 

fibers; these meetings are not open to 

the public. Upon completion of its 

review, the NTP will (1) Draft a 

substance profile for glass wool fibers 

that contains its listing recommendation 

for the 12th RoC and the scientific 

information supporting that 

recommendation, (2) solicit public 

comment on the draft substance profile, 

and (3) convene a meeting of the NTP 

Board of Scientific Counselors to peer 

review the draft substance profile. 

Background Information on the RoC 

The RoC is a congressionally 

mandated document that identifies and 

discusses agents, substances, mixtures, 

or exposure circumstances (collectively 

referred to as ‘‘substances’’) that may 

pose a hazard to human health by virtue 

of their carcinogenicity. The RoC 

follows a formal, multi-step process for 

review and evaluation of candidate 

substances. Substances are listed in the 

report as either known or reasonably 

anticipated human carcinogens. The 

NTP prepares the RoC on behalf of the 

Secretary of Health and Human 

Services. Information about the RoC and 

the review process is available on its 

Web site (http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/go/ 

roc) or by contacting Dr. Lunn (see ‘‘FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT’’ above). 

Dated: August 5, 2009. 

John R. Bucher, 

Associate Director, National Toxicology 

Program. 

[FR Doc. E9–19329 Filed 8–11–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4140–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Substance Abuse and Mental Health 

Services Administration 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities: Submission for OMB 

Review; Comment Request 

Periodically, the Substance Abuse and 

Mental Health Services Administration 

(SAMHSA) will publish a summary of 

information collection requests under 

OMB review, in compliance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 

Chapter 35). To request a copy of these 

documents, call the SAMHSA Reports 

Clearance Officer on (240) 276–1243. 

Project: Evaluation of Strategic 

Prevention Framework State Incentive 

Grant (SPF SIG) Program (OMB No. 

0930–0279) Revision 

SAMHSA’s Center for Substance 

Abuse Prevention (CSAP) is responsible 

for the evaluation instruments of the 

Strategic Prevention Framework State 

Incentive Grant (SPF SIG) Program. The 

program is a major initiative designed 

to: (1) Prevent the onset and reduce the 

progression of substance abuse, 

including childhood and underage 

drinking; (2) reduce substance abuse 

related problems; and, (3) build 

prevention capacity and infrastructure 

at the State-, territorial-, tribal- and 

community-levels. 

Five Steps Comprise the SPF 

Step 1: Profile population needs, 

resources, and readiness to address the 

problems and gaps in service delivery. 

Step 2: Mobilize and/or build capacity 

to address needs. 

Step 3: Develop a comprehensive 

strategic plan. 

Step 4: Implement evidence-based 

prevention programs, policies, and 

practices and infrastructure 

development activities. 

Step 5: Monitor process, evaluate 

effectiveness, sustain effective 

programs/activities, and improve or 

replace those that fail. 

An evaluation team is currently 

implementing a multi-method, quasiexperimental evaluation of the first two 

Strategic Prevention Framework State 

Incentive Grant (SPF SIG) cohorts 

receiving grants in FY 2004 and FY 

2005. This notice invites comments for 

revision to the protocol for the ongoing 

cross-site evaluation for the Strategic 

Prevention Framework State Incentive 

Grant (SPF SIG) (OMB No. 0930–0279) 

which expires on 09/30/09. This 

revision includes two parts: 

(1) Continuation of the use of the 

previously approved two-part 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
40600 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 12, 2009 / Notices 

Community Level Instrument (CLI parts 

I and II) for Cohorts I and II. 

(2) The use of three additional 

instruments to support the SPF SIG 

Cohorts III and IV Cross-site Evaluation. 

All three instruments are modified 

versions of data collection protocols 

used by Cohorts I and II. The three 

instruments are: 

a. A Grantee-Level SPF 

Implementation Instrument, 

b. A Grantee-Level Infrastructure 

Instrument, and 

c. A two-part Community-Level SPF 

Implementation Instrument. 

An additional Cohort III and IV 

evaluation component (i.e., participantlevel NOMs outcomes) is also included 

in this submission as part of the 

comprehensive evaluation, however, no 

associated burden from this evaluation 

activity is being imposed and therefore 

clearance to conduct the activities is not 

being requested. Specifically, Cohort III 

and IV SPF SIG grantees have been 

included in the currently OMB 

approved umbrella NOMs application 

(OMB No. 0930–0230) covering the 

collection of participant-level NOMs 

outcomes by all SAMHSA/CSAP 

grantees. 

Every attempt has been made to make 

the evaluation for Cohorts III and IV 

comparable to Cohorts I and II. This 

notification reflects some streamlining 

of the original evaluation design. The 

primary evaluation objective is to 

determine the impact of SPF SIG on the 

reduction of substance abuse related 

problems, on building State prevention 

capacity and infrastructure, and 

preventing the onset and reducing the 

progression of substance abuse, as 

measured by the SAMHSA National 

Outcomes Measures (NOMs). Data 

collected at the grantee, community, 

and participant levels will provide 

information about process and system 

outcomes at the grantee and community 

levels as well as context for analyzing 

participant-level NOMS outcomes. The 

Grantee-Level Infrastructure and 

Implementation Instruments (Cohorts III 

and IV) and the Community-Level part 

I and part II (Cohorts I, II, III, and IV) 

Instruments are included in an OMB 

review package and are the main focus 

of this announcement. 

Grantee-Level Data Collection (Cohort 

III and IV Revision) 

Two Grantee-level Instruments (GLI) 

were developed to gather information 

about the infrastructure of the grantee’s 

overall prevention system and collect 

data regarding the grantee’s efforts and 

progress in implementing the Strategic 

Prevention Framework 5-step process. 

Both instruments are modified versions 

of the grantee-level interview protocols 

used in the SPF SIG Cohort I and II 

Cross-Site Evaluation (OMB No. 0930– 

0279). The total burden imposed by the 

original interview protocols has been 

reduced by restructuring the format of 

the original protocol, deleting several 

questions and replacing the majority of 

open-ended questions with multiplechoice-response questions. The 

Infrastructure Instrument will capture 

data to assess infrastructure change and 

to test the relationship of this change to 

outcomes. The Strategic Prevention 

Framework Implementation Instrument 

will be used to assess the relationship 

between SPF implementation and 

change in the NOMs. Information for 

both surveys will be gathered by the 

grantees’ evaluators twice over the life 

of the SPF SIG award. 

Based on the current 16 grantees 

funded in Cohort III and an estimated 20 

to be funded in Cohort IV the estimated 

annual burden for grantee-level data 

collection is displayed below in Table 1. 

The burden estimates for the GLIs are 

based on the experience in the Cohort 

I and II SPF SIG evaluation as reported 

in the original OMB submission (OMB 

No. 0930–0279), less the considerable 

reduction in length of these instruments 

implemented by the Cohort III and IV 

evaluation team. 

Community-Level Data Collection 

(Continuation and Revision) 

Cohort I and II Continuation 

The Community-level Instrument 

(CLI) is a two part, Web-based survey for 

capturing information about SPF SIG 

implementation at the community level 

(originally submitted as an addendum to 

OMB No. 0930–0279). Part I of this 

instrument was developed to assess the 

progress of communities as they 

implement the Strategic Prevention 

Framework (SPF), and part II was 

developed to gather descriptive 

information about the specific 

interventions being implemented at the 

community level and the populations 

being served including the gender, age, 

race, ethnicity, and number of 

individuals in target populations. Each 

SPF SIG funded community will 

complete a separate part II form for each 

intervention they implement. 

The CLI (parts I and II) was designed 

to be administered two times a year 

(every six months) over the course of the 

SPF SIG Cohort I and II initiative. Four 

rounds of data are being collected under 

the current OMB approval period and 

the Cohorts I and II cross-site evaluation 

team plans to collect additional rounds 

once this request for a revision is 

approved. Data from this instrument 

will allow CSAP to assess the progress 

of the communities in their 

implementation of both the SPF and 

prevention-related interventions funded 

under the initiative. The data may also 

be used to assess obstacles to the 

implementation of the SPF and 

prevention-related interventions and 

facilitate mid-course corrections for 

communities experiencing 

implementation difficulties. 

The estimated annual burden for 

community-level data collection is 

displayed below in Table 1. Note that 

the total burden reflects the 359 

communities that have received SPF 

funds from their respective Cohort I 

States and 86 communities that have 

received SPF funds from their 

respective Cohort II States. Burden 

estimates are based on pilot 

respondents’ feedback as well as the 

experience of the survey developers 

reported in the original OMB 

submission (OMB No. 0930–0279). 

Additionally, an individual 

community’s burden may be lower than 

the burden displayed in Table 1 because 

all sections of the Community-level 

Instrument (parts I and II) may not 

apply for each reporting period as 

community partners work through the 

SPF steps and only report on the steprelated activities addressed. Note also 

that some questions will be addressed 

only once and the responses will be 

used to pre-fill subsequent surveys. 

Cohort III and IV Revision 

The Community-Level Instrument to 

be completed by Cohort III and IV 

funded subrecipient communities is a 

modified version of the one in use in the 

SPF SIG Cohorts I and II Cross-Site 

Evaluation (OMB No. 0930–0279). The 

total burden imposed by the original 

instrument was reduced by reorganizing 

the format of the original instrument, 

optimizing the use of skip patterns, and 

replacing the majority of open-ended 

questions with multiple-choiceresponse questions. 

Part I of the instrument will gather 

information on the communities’ 

progress implementing the five SPF SIG 

steps and efforts taken to ensure cultural 

competency throughout the SPF SIG 

process. Subrecipient communities 

receiving SPF SIG awards will be 

required to complete part I of the 

instrument annually. Part 2 will capture 

data on the specific prevention 

intervention(s) implemented at the 

community level. A single prevention 

intervention may be comprised of a 

single strategy or a set of multiple 

strategies. A part II instrument will be 

completed for each prevention 

intervention strategy implemented 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 12, 2009 / Notices 40601 

during the specified reporting period. 

Specific questions will be tailored to 

match the type of prevention 

intervention strategy implemented (e.g., 

Prevention Education, Communitybased Processes, and Environmental). 

Information collected on each strategy 

will include date of implementation, 

numbers of groups and participants 

served, frequency of activities, and 

gender, age, race, and ethnicity of 

population served/affected. 

Subrecipient communities’ partners 

receiving SPF SIG awards will be 

required to update part II of the 

instrument a minimum of every six 

months. 

The estimated annual burden for 

specific segments of the communitylevel data collection is displayed in 

Table 1. The burden estimates for the 

CLIs are based on the experience in the 

Cohort I and II SPF SIG evaluation as 

reported in the original OMB 

submission (OMB No. 0930–0279), less 

the considerable reduction in length of 

these instruments implemented by the 

Cohort III and IV evaluation team. The 

total burden assumes an average of 15 

community-level subrecipients per 

grantee (n=36 Grantees) for a total of 540 

community respondents, annual 

completion of the CLI part I, a minimum 

of two instrument updates per year for 

the CLI part II, and an average of three 

distinct prevention intervention 

strategies implemented by each 

community during a 6-month period. 

Additionally, some questions will be 

addressed only once and the responses 

will be used to pre-fill subsequent 

updates. 

Participant-Level Data Collection 

(Cohort III and IV—New) 

Participant-level change will be 

measured using the CSAP NOMs Adult 

and Youth Programs Survey Forms 

already approved by OMB (OMB No. 

0930–0230). Subrecipient communities 

will have the opportunity to select 

relevant measures from the CSAP NOMs 

Adult and Youth Programs Survey 

Forms based on site-specific targeted 

program outcomes and may voluntarily 

select additional outcome measures that 

are relevant to their own initiatives. 

Cohort III and IV SPF SIG grantees have 

been included in the currently OMB 

approved umbrella NOMs application 

(OMB No. 0930–0230) covering all 

SAMHSA/CSAP grantees, therefore no 

additional burden for this evaluation 

activity is being imposed and clearance 

to conduct the activities is not being 

requested. 

Total Estimates of Annualized Hour 

Burden 

Estimates of total and annualized 

reporting burden for respondents by 

evaluation cohort are displayed below 

in Table 1. The estimated average 

annual burden of 5,620.8 hours is based 

on the completion of the Community 

Level-Instrument (CLI parts I and II) for 

Cohorts I and II and the Grantee-level 

Instruments (GLI) and the CommunityLevel Instrument (CLI) for Cohorts III 

and IV. 

TABLE 1—ESTIMATES OF ANNUALIZED HOUR BURDEN TO RESPONDENTS

Instrument type Respondent 

Burden per 

response 

(hrs.) 

No. of 

respondents 

No. of 

responses per 

respondent 

Total burden 

(hrs.) 

Grantee-Level Burden Cohort 1 

Total/Average Burden Over 1 Reporting Year.Grantee ............................................ 1 21 2 42 

Community-Level Burden Cohort 1 

CLI Part 1 .......................................... Community ....................................... 2.17 359 2 1,558.0 

CLI Part 2 .......................................... Community ....................................... 2.17 359 6 4,674.2 

Review of Past Responses ............... Community ....................................... 2.5 359 2 1,795.0 

Total/Average Burden Over 1 Reporting Year.Community ....................................... ........................ ........................ ........................ 8,027.2

Grantee-Level Burden Cohort 2 

Total Burden Over 2 Reporting 

Years.

Grantee ............................................ 1 5 4 20 

Average Annual Burden .................... Grantee ............................................ ........................ ........................ ........................ 10 

Community-Level Burden Cohort 2 

CLI Part 1 .......................................... Community ....................................... 2.17 86 4 746.5 

CLI Part 2 .......................................... Community ....................................... 2.17 86 12 2,239.4 

Review of Past Responses ............... Community ....................................... 2.5 86 4 860.0 

Total Burden Over 2 Reporting 

Years.

Community ....................................... ........................ ........................ ........................ 3,845.9

Average Annual Burden .................... Community ....................................... ........................ ........................ ........................ 1,923.0 

Total Burden Cohorts 1 and 2 

Total Burden Over 2 Reporting 

Years.

Grantee ............................................ ........................ ........................ ........................ 62 

Community ........................................ ........................................................... ........................ ........................ ........................ 11,873.1 

Average Annual Burden .................... Grantee ............................................ ........................ ........................ ........................ 31 

Community ........................................ ........................................................... ........................ ........................ ........................ 5,936.6 

Grantee-Level Burden Cohorts 3 and 

4 

GLI Infrastructure & Implementation 

Instruments (Reporting Years 1–4).

Grantee ............................................ 4.75 36 2 342.0 

CLI Part I, 1–20: Community Contact 

Information (Reporting Year 1).

Grantee ............................................ 1.5 36 1 54.0 

CLI Part I, 1–20: Community Contact 

Information (Reporting Years 2–4).

Grantee ............................................ 0.25 36 3 27.0 

Total Burden Over 4 Reporting 

Years.

Grantee ............................................ ........................ ........................ ........................ 423.0 

Average Annual Burden .................... Grantee ............................................ ........................ ........................ ........................ 105.75 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
40602 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 12, 2009 / Notices 

TABLE 1—ESTIMATES OF ANNUALIZED HOUR BURDEN TO RESPONDENTS—Continued 

Instrument type Respondent 

Burden per 

response 

(hrs.) 

No. of 

respondents 

No. of 

responses per 

respondent 

Total burden 

(hrs.) 

Community-Level Burden Cohorts 3 

and 4 

CLI Part I, 21–172: Community SPF 

Activities (Reporting Year 1).

Community ....................................... 3 540 1 1620.0 

CLI Part II (Reporting Year 1) .......... Community ....................................... 0.75 540 6 2,430.0 

CLI Part I, 21–172: Community SPF 

Activities (Reporting Years 2–4).

Community ....................................... 0.75 540 3 1,215 

CLI Part II (Reporting Years 2–4) ..... Community ....................................... 0.5 540 18 4,860.0 

Total burden Over 4 Reporting Periods.Community ....................................... ........................ ........................ ........................ 10,125.0 

Average Annual Burden .................... Community ....................................... ........................ ........................ ........................ 2,531.25 

Total Burden All Cohorts 

Total Burden Over 4 Reporting 

Years.

Grantee ............................................ ........................ ........................ ........................ 485.0 

........................................................... Community ....................................... ........................ ........................ ........................ 21,998.1 

Average Annual Burden .................... Grantee ............................................ ........................ ........................ ........................ 121.3 

Community ....................................... ........................ ........................ ........................ 5,499.6

Overall .............................................. ........................ ........................ ........................ 5,620.8 

Written comments and 

recommendations concerning the 

proposed information collection should 

be sent by September 11, 2009 to: 

SAMHSA Desk Officer, Human 

Resources and Housing Branch, Office 

of Management and Budget, New 

Executive Office Building, Room 10235, 

Washington, DC 20503; due to potential 

delays in OMB’s receipt and processing 

of mail sent through the U.S. Postal 

Service, respondents are encouraged to 

submit comments by fax to: 202–395– 

6974. 

Dated: August 6, 2009. 

Elaine Parry, 

Director, Office of Program Services. 

[FR Doc. E9–19291 Filed 8–11–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4162–20–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

National Institutes of Health 

National Institute of Allergy and 

Infectious Diseases; Notice of Closed 

Meeting 

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the 

Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 

amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is 

hereby given of the following meeting. 

The meeting will be closed to the 

public in accordance with the 

provisions set forth in sections 

552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., 

as amended. The contract proposals and 

the discussions could disclose 

confidential trade secrets or commercial 

property such as patentable material, 

and personal information concerning 

individuals associated with the contract 

proposals, the disclosure of which 

would constitute a clearly unwarranted 

invasion of personal privacy. 

Name of Committee: National Institute of 

Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special 

Emphasis Panel, Infectious Diseases Clinical 

Studies and Trails. 

Date: September 16, 2009. 

Time: 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. 

Agenda: To review and evaluate contract 

proposals. 

Place: Crowne Plaza Hotel—Silver Spring, 

8777 Georgia Avenue, Silver Spring, MD 

20910. 

Contact Person: Edward W. Schroder, PhD, 

Scientific Review Administrator, Scientific 

Review Program, Division of Extramural 

Activities, NIAID, NIH, Room 2156, 6700–B 

Rockledge Drive, MSC 7616, Bethesda, MD 

20892–7616, 301–496–2550. 

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance 

Program Nos. 93.855, Allergy, Immunology, 

and Transplantation Research; 93.856, 

Microbiology and Infectious Diseases 

Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS) 

Dated: August 5, 2009. 

Jennifer Spaeth, 

Director, Office of Federal Advisory 

Committee Policy. 

[FR Doc. E9–19320 Filed 8–11–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4140–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Substance Abuse and Mental Health 

Services Administration 

Center for Substance Abuse 

Treatment; Notice of Meeting 

Pursuant to Public Law 92–463, 

notice is hereby given that the 

Substance Abuse and Mental Health 

Services Administration (SAMHSA) 

Center for Substance Abuse Treatment 

(CSAT) National Advisory Council will 

meet on August 24, 2009 from 1 p.m. to 

3 p.m. via teleconference. 

The meeting will include discussion 

and evaluation of grant applications 

reviewed by Initial Review Groups. 

Therefore, the meeting will be closed to 

the public as determined by the 

Administrator, SAMHSA, in accordance 

with Title 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(6) and 5 

U.S.C. App. 2, section 10(d). 

Substantive program information, a 

summary of the meeting and a roster of 

Council members may be obtained as 

soon as possible after the meeting, either 

by accessing the SAMHSA Committee 

Web site at http://www.nac.samhsa.gov, 

or by contacting CSAT National 

Advisory Council’s Designated Federal 

Official, Ms. Cynthia Graham (see 

contact information below). 

Committee Name: SAMHSA Center for 

Substance Abuse Treatment National 

Advisory Council. 

Dates/Times/Types: August 24, 2009, from 

1 p.m. to 3 p.m.: Closed. 

Place: SAMHSA Building, 1 Choke Cherry 

Road, Great Falls Room, Rockville, Maryland 

20857. 

Contact: Cynthia Graham, M.S., Designated 

Federal Official, SAMHSA CSAT National 

Advisory Council, 1 Choke Cherry Road, 

Room 5–1035, Rockville, Maryland 20857. 

Telephone: (240) 276–1692. Fax: (240) 276– 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES