52664 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 2011 / Notices 

Approximate Number of Awards: 15– 

17. 

Approximate Average Award: 

$625,000. 

Fiscal Year Funds: 2011. 

Anticipated Award Date: September 

30, 2011. 

Budget Period: 12 months. 

Project Period: 1 year. 

Application Selection Process 

Only applicants who have applied for 

and have been selected as Prevention 

Research Centers under CDC Program 

Announcement DP–09–001 were 

eligible to apply for the annual 

continuation funding. 

Funding Authority 

CDC will add the following Authority 

to that which is reflected in the 

published Funding Opportunity: 

—Section 4002 of the Patient Protection 

and Affordable Care Act (Pub. L. 111– 

148.). 

DATES: The effective date for this action 

is August 23, 2011 and remains in effect 

until the expiration of the project period 

of the ACA funded applications. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Elmira Benson, Deputy Director, 

Procurement and Grants Office, Centers 

for Disease Control and Prevention, 

2920 Brandywine Road, Atlanta, GA 

30341, telephone (770) 488–2802, e-mail 

Elmira.Benson@cdc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March 

23, 2010, the President signed into law 

the Patient Protection and Affordable 

Care Act (ACA). ACA is designed to 

improve and expand the scope of health 

care coverage for Americans. Cost 

savings through disease prevention is an 

important element of this legislation 

and ACA has established a Prevention 

and Public Health Fund (PPHF) for this 

purpose. Specifically, the legislation 

states in Section 4002 that the PPHF is 

to ‘‘provide for expanded and sustained 

national investment in prevention and 

public health programs to improve 

health and help restrain the rate of 

growth in private and public sector 

health care costs. ACA and the 

Prevention and Public Health Fund 

make improving public health a priority 

with investments to improve public 

health. 

The PPHF states that the Secretary 

shall transfer amounts in the Fund to 

accounts within the Department of 

Health and Human Services to increase 

funding, over the fiscal year 2008 level, 

for programs authorized by the Public 

Health Services Act, for prevention, 

wellness and public health activities 

including prevention research and 

health screenings, such as the 

Community Transformation Grant 

Program, the Education and Outreach 

Campaign for Preventative Benefits, and 

Immunization Programs. 

ACA legislation affords an important 

opportunity to advance public health 

across the lifespan and to reduce health 

disparities by supporting an intensive 

community approach to chronic disease 

prevention and control. 

Therefore, the FOA program activities 

CDC proposes to fund with ACA 

appropriations are authorized by the 

amendment to the Public Health 

Services Act which authorized the 

Prevention and Wellness Program. 

Dated: August 9, 2011. 

Tanja Popovic, 

Deputy Associate Director for Science, 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 

[FR Doc. 2011–21343 Filed 8–22–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4163–18–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention 

[Docket Number NIOSH–240] 

Request for Information: 

Announcement of Carcinogen and 

Recommended Exposure Limit (REL) 

Policy Assessment 

AGENCY: National Institute for 

Occupational Safety and Health 

(NIOSH) of the Centers for Disease 

Control and Prevention (CDC), 

Department of Health and Human 

Services (HHS). 

ACTION: Notice of public comment 

period. 

SUMMARY: The National Institute for 

Occupational Safety and Health 

(NIOSH) of the Centers for Disease 

Control and Prevention (CDC) intends to 

review its approach to classifying 

carcinogens and establishing 

recommended exposure limits (RELs) 

for occupational exposures to hazards 

associated with cancer. As part of this 

effort, NIOSH is requesting initial input 

on these issues (including answers to 

the 5 questions in the following 

section), to be submitted to the NIOSH 

Docket number 240, for a comment 

period lasting through September 22, 

2011. This information will be taken 

under consideration and used to inform 

NIOSH efforts to assess and document 

its carcinogen policy and REL policy 

regarding occupational hazards 

associated with cancer. NIOSH has also 

created a new NIOSH Cancer and REL 

Policy Web Topic Page [see http:// 

www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/cancer/ 

policy.html] to provide additional 

details about this effort and progress 

updates. 

Public Comment Period: Comments 

must be received by September 22, 

2011. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments, 

identified by docket number NIOSH– 

240, may be submitted by any of the 

following methods: 

• Mail: NIOSH Docket Office, Robert 

A. Taft Laboratories, MS–C34, 4676 

Columbia Parkway, Cincinnati, Ohio 

45226. 

• Facsimile: (513) 533–8285. 

• E-mail: nioshdocket@cdc.gov. 

All information received in response 

to this notice will be available for public 

examination and copying at the NIOSH 

Docket Office, 4676 Columbia Parkway, 

Room 111, Cincinnati, Ohio 45226. A 

complete electronic docket containing 

all comments submitted will be 

available on the NIOSH Web page at 

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docket, and 

comments will be available in writing 

by request. NIOSH includes all 

comments received without change in 

the docket, including any personal 

information provided. All electronic 

comments should be formatted as 

Microsoft Word. Please make reference 

to docket number NIOSH–240. 

Background 

NIOSH is announcing a Request for 

Information on key issues identified and 

associated with the NIOSH Carcinogen 

and REL policies. Special emphasis will 

be placed on consideration of technical 

and scientific issues with the current 

NIOSH Cancer and REL Policies that 

require further examination including 

the following: 

(1) Should there explicitly be a 

carcinogen policy as opposed to a 

broader policy on toxicant identification 

and classification (e.g. carcinogens, 

reproductive hazards, neurotoxic 

agents)? 

(2) What evidence should form the 

basis for determining that substances are 

carcinogens? How should these criteria 

correspond to nomenclature and 

categorizations (e.g., known, reasonably 

anticipated, etc.)? 

(3) Should 1 in 1,000 working lifetime 

risk (for persons occupationally 

exposed) be the target level for a 

recommended exposure limit (REL) for 

carcinogens or should lower targets be 

considered? 

(4) In establishing NIOSH RELs, how 

should the phrase ‘‘to the extent 

feasible’’ (defined in the 1995 NIOSH 

Recommended Exposure Limit Policy) 

be interpreted and applied? 

(5) In the absence of data, what 

uncertainties or assumptions are 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 2011 / Notices 52665 

appropriate for use in the development 

of RELs? What is the utility of a 

standard ’’action level’’ (i.e., an 

exposure limit set below the REL 

typically used to trigger risk 

management actions) and how should it 

be set? How should NIOSH address 

worker exposure to complex mixtures? 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NIOSH 

and stakeholders have expressed 

concerns recently about limitations in 

the NIOSH Carcinogen Policy, 

prompting NIOSH to initiate a review of 

the carcinogen policy in 2010. A major 

limitation in the policy is the use of the 

term ‘‘Potential Occupational 

Carcinogen’’ which dates to the 1980 

OSHA hazard classification for 

carcinogens outlined in 29 CFR 

1990.103 and is defined as ‘‘* * * any 

substance, or combination or mixture of 

substances, which causes an increased 

incidence of benign and/or malignant 

neoplasms, or a substantial decrease in 

the latency period between exposure 

and onset of neoplasms in humans or in 

one or more experimental mammalian 

species as the result of any oral, 

respiratory or dermal exposure, or any 

other exposure which results in the 

induction of tumors at a site other than 

the site of administration. This 

definition also includes any substance 

which is metabolized into one or more 

potential occupational carcinogens by 

mammals.’’ A major limitation of this 

definition is that the policy allows for 

only one cancer category, which is 

‘‘potential occupational carcinogen.’’ 

The adjective ‘‘potential’’ conveys 

uncertainty that is not warranted with 

many carcinogens such as asbestos, 

benzene, and others. This policy does 

not allow for classification on the basis 

of the magnitude and sufficiency of the 

scientific evidence. In contrast, other 

organizations, such as the International 

Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) 

and the National Toxicology Program 

(NTP) allow for a more differential 

classification. 

The revision of the NIOSH Carcinogen 

Policy also coincides with the 

international realization that there is a 

need for more efficient and quicker 

means of classifying chemicals. 

Qualitative and semi-quantitative 

approaches such as hazard banding are 

increasingly being investigated as a 

means of addressing the vast numbers of 

unregulated chemicals. NIOSH has been 

in collaboration with various 

organizations to consider utilizing 

hazard banding approaches to control 

chemicals. This will also be reflected in 

the review of the carcinogen and RELs 

policies. 

This Federal Register notice serves to 

provide stakeholders and the public an 

opportunity for input on the revision of 

the NIOSH Carcinogen and REL 

Policies. It is anticipated that NIOSH 

will develop a report on the revised 

NIOSH Carcinogen and REL Policies to 

be made available in the Spring of 2012. 

Additional information regarding 

NIOSH plans to assess and revise the 

Carcinogen and REL Policy can be 

found in the April 2011 NIOSH e-news 

at http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/enews/ 

enewsV8N12.html and on the NIOSH 

Cancer and REL Policy Web Topic Page 

[see http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/ 

cancer/policy.html]. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: T.J. 

Lentz, telephone (513) 533–8260, or 

Faye Rice, telephone (513) 533–8335, 

NIOSH, MS–C32, Robert A. Taft 

Laboratories, 4676 Columbia Parkway, 

Cincinnati, Ohio 45226. 

Dated: August 12, 2011. 

John Howard, 

Director, National Institute for Occupational 

Safety and Health, Centers for Disease Control 

and Prevention. 

[FR Doc. 2011–21405 Filed 8–22–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4163–19–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Food and Drug Administration 

[Docket No. FDA–2011–N–0129] 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; Submission for Office of 

Management and Budget Review; 

Comment Request; Comparing 

Nutrition Knowledge, Attitude, and 

Behavior Among English-Dominant 

Hispanics, Spanish-Dominant 

Hispanics, and Other Consumers 

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, 

HHS. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug 

Administration (FDA) is announcing 

that a proposed collection of 

information has been submitted to the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) for review and clearance under 

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. 

DATES: Fax written comments on the 

collection of information by September 

22, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: To ensure that comments on 

the information collection are received, 

OMB recommends that written 

comments be faxed to the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer, FAX: 

202–395–7285, or e-mailed to 

oira_submission@omb.eop.gov. All 

comments should be identified with the 

OMB control number 0910–New and 

title ‘‘Comparing Nutrition Knowledge, 

Attitude, and Behavior Among EnglishDominant Hispanics, Spanish-Dominant 

Hispanics, and Other Consumers.’’ Also 

include the FDA docket number found 

in brackets in the heading of this 

document. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Denver Presley, Office of Information 

Management, Food and Drug 

Administration, 1350 Piccard Dr., PI50– 

400B, Rockville, MD 20850, 301–796– 

3793. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 

compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA 

has submitted the following proposed 

collection of information to OMB for 

review and clearance. 

Comparing Nutrition Knowledge, 

Attitude, and Behavior Among EnglishDominant Hispanics, SpanishDominant Hispanics, and Other 

Consumers—(OMB Control Number 

0910–NEW) 

I. Background 

Recent estimates suggest that 

Hispanics (defined as those who 

identify themselves as of Hispanic or 

Latino origin) are the largest and fastest 

growing minority group in the nation; 

the proportion of the U.S. population 

that was Hispanic was 14 percent in 

2005 and is projected to increase to 29 

percent in 2050 (Ref. 1). 

Data from the Centers for Disease 

Control and Prevention (CDC) indicate 

that, in 2005 and 2006, 34.3 percent and 

32.7 percent of the U.S. adult 

population are obese and overweight, 

respectively (Ref. 2). According to CDC, 

Hispanics had 21 percent higher obesity 

prevalence than Whites in 2008 (Ref. 3). 

CDC data also indicate variations in 

prevalence of obesity among adults of 

different race-gender groups; for 

example, during 2006 through 2008, 

non-Hispanic Blacks had the greatest 

prevalence of obesity (35.7 percent), 

followed by Hispanics (28.7 percent), 

and non-Hispanic Whites (23.7 percent); 

non-Hispanic Black women had the 

greatest prevalence (39.2 percent), 

followed by non-Hispanic Black men 

(31.6 percent), Hispanic women (29.4 

percent), Hispanic men (27.8 percent), 

non-Hispanic White men (25.4 percent), 

and non-Hispanic White women (21.8 

percent) (Ref. 3). 

While some Hispanics living in the 

United States use the English language 

exclusively or more often than Spanish 

(English-dominant Hispanics), other 

U.S. Hispanics predominantly use the 

Spanish language in their daily lives 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES