10220 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 44 / Wednesday, March 7, 2007 / Notices 

Dated: February 28, 2007. 

Joan F. Karr, 

Acting Reports Clearance Officer, Centers for 

Disease Control and Prevention. 

[FR Doc. E7–3986 Filed 3–6–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4163–18–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Administration for Children and 

Families 

Statement of Organization, Functions 

and Delegation of Authority; 

Republication 

Editorial Note: FR Doc. E7–3306 originally 

published at page 8742 in the issue of 

Tuesday, February 27, 2007. The original 

publication contained erroneous text. As a 

result, the corrected document is being 

republished in its entirety. 

Notice is hereby given that I have 

delegated to the Director, Office of Head 

Start, the following authority vested in 

me by the Secretary of Health and 

Human Services in a memorandum 

dated August 20, 1991, pertaining to the 

Head Start Program and the Child 

Development Associate Scholarship 

Assistance Grants Program. 

(a) Authority Delegated 

Authority to administer the Head 

Start Program under the Head Start Act, 

42 U.S.C. 9801 et seq., and as amended 

now and hereafter. (This includes 

authority to administer the Early Head 

Start program.) 

(b) Limitations 

1. This delegation of authority shall 

be exercised under the Department’s 

existing policies on delegations and 

regulations. 

2. This delegation of authority does 

not include the authority to submit 

reports to Congress and shall be 

exercised under financial and 

administrative requirements applicable 

to all Administration for Children and 

Families’ authorities. 

3. The approval or disapproval of 

grant applications including refunding 

applications, the making of grant 

awards, the waiver of non-Federal share 

under 42 U.S.C. 9835(b), the waiver of 

fifteen percent administrative cost 

limitations under 42 U.S.C. 9839(b), and 

the approval of interim grantees under 

42 U.S.C. 9836(e) requires concurrence 

of the appropriate Grants Officer. The 

approval or disapproval of contract 

proposals and awards is subject to the 

requirements of the Federal Acquisition 

Regulations and requires the 

concurrence of the Contracting Officer. 

4. This delegation of authority does 

not include the authority to approve or 

disapprove awards for grants or 

contracts for research, demonstration, or 

evaluation under section 649 of the 

Head Start Act. 

5. This delegation of authority does 

not include the authority to appoint 

Central Office or Regional Office Grant 

Officers for the administration of the 

Head Start Program. 

6. This delegation of authority does 

not include the authority to appoint 

Action Officials for Audit Resolution. 

7. This delegation of authority does 

not include the authority to sign and 

issue notices of grant awards. 

8. This delegation of authority does 

not include the authority to hold 

hearings. This limitation does not 

include the ‘‘informal meetings’’

authorized in 45 CFR part 1303. 

9. Any redelegation shall be in writing 

and prompt notification must be 

provided to all affected managers, 

supervisors, and other personnel, and 

requires the concurrence of the Deputy 

Assistant Secretary for Administration. 

(c) Effect on Existing Delegations 

As related to this delegation of 

authority, this delegation supersedes all 

previous delegations of authority 

involving the Head Start Program except 

the September 25, 2002, delegation to 

the Director, Office of Planning, 

Research and Evaluation relating to 

section 649 of the Head Start Act. 

(d) Effective Date 

This delegation is effective upon the 

date of signature. 

I hereby affirm and ratify any actions 

taken by the Director, Office of Head 

Start, which involved the exercise of the 

authority delegated herein prior to the 

effective date of this delegation. 

Dated: February 16, 2007. 

Wade F. Horn, 

Assistant Secretary for Children and Families. 

[FR Doc. E7–3306 Filed 2–26–07; 8:45 am] 

Editorial Note: FR Doc. E7–3306 originally 

published at page 8742 in the issue of 

Tuesday, February 27, 2007. The original 

publication contained erroneous text. As a 

result, the corrected document is being 

republished in its entirety. 

[FR Doc. R7–3306 Filed 3–6–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1505–01–D 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Food and Drug Administration 

[Docket No. 2006N–0036] 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; Submission for Office of 

Management and Budget Review; 

Comment Request; Experimental 

Study of Possible Footnotes and 

Cueing Schemes to Help Consumers 

Interpret Quantitative Trans Fat 

Disclosure on the Nutrition Facts Panel 

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 April 6, 

2007. 

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: 

202–395–6974. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jonna Capezzuto, Office of the Chief 

Information Officer (HFA–250), Food 

and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers 

Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, 301–827–

4659. 

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. In the Federal 

Register of December 18, 2006 (71 FR 

75762), FDA published a notice entitled 

‘‘Agency Information Collection 

Activities; Submission for Office of 

Management and Budget Review; 

Comment Request; Experimental Study 

of Possible Footnotes and Cueing 

Schemes to Help Consumers Interpret 

Quantitative Trans Fat Disclosure on the 

Nutrition Facts Panel.’’ This notice 

contained an incorrect deadline for 

comments on the proposed collection of 

information in the DATES section. FDA 

is republishing the notice and providing 

a full 30-day comment period. Any 

comments previously submitted 

regarding this notice will be considered 

and do not need to be re-submitted. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 44 / Wednesday, March 7, 2007 / Notices 10221 

Experimental Study of Possible 

Footnotes and Cueing Schemes to Help 

Consumers Interpret Quantitative 

Trans Fat Disclosure on the Nutrition 

Facts Panel—(OMB Control Number 

0910–0532)—Reinstatement 

FDA is requesting OMB approval of 

an experimental study of possible 

footnotes and cueing schemes intended 

to help consumers interpret quantitative 

trans fat information on the Nutrition 

Facts Panel (NFP) of a food product. The 

purpose of the experimental study is to 

help FDA’s Center for Food Safety and 

Applied Nutrition formulate decisions 

and policies affecting labeling 

requirements for trans fat disclosure. 

In the Federal Register of July 11, 

2003 (68 FR 41434), FDA issued a final 

rule requiring disclosure on the NFP of 

quantitative trans fat information on a 

separate line without any accompanying 

footnote. At the same time, the agency 

issued an advance notice of proposed 

rulemaking entitled ‘‘Food Labeling: 

Trans Fatty Acids in Nutrition Labeling; 

Consumer Research to Consider 

Nutrient Content and Health Claims and 

Possible Footnote or Disclosure 

Statements’’ (68 FR 41507) which 

requested comments about possible 

footnotes to help consumers better 

understand trans fat declarations on the 

product label. The agency sought 

comments about whether it should 

consider requiring statements about 

trans fat, either alone or in combination 

with saturated fat and cholesterol, as a 

footnote on the NFP to enhance 

consumers’ understanding about such 

cholesterol-raising lipids and how to 

use information on the label to make 

healthy food choices. Comments 

received in response to the notice 

contained suggested footnotes and 

cueing schemes. The proposed 

experimental study will evaluate the 

ability of several possible footnotes and 

cueing schemes to help consumers make 

heart-healthy food choices. The results 

of the experimental study will provide 

empirical support for possible policy 

decisions about the need for such 

requirements and the appropriate form 

they should take. 

FDA or its contractor will use 

information gathered from Internet 

panel samples to evaluate how 

consumers understand and respond to 

possible footnote and cueing schemes. 

The distinctive features of Internet 

panels for the purpose of the 

experimental study are that they allow 

for controlled visual presentation of 

study materials, experimental 

manipulation of study materials, and 

the random assignment of subjects to 

condition. Experimental manipulation 

of labels and random assignment to 

condition makes it possible to estimate 

the effects of the various possible 

footnotes and cueing schemes while 

controlling for individual differences 

between subjects. Random assignment 

ensures that mean differences between 

conditions can be tested using wellknown techniques such as analysis of 

variance or regression analysis to yield 

statistically valid estimates of effect 

size. The study will be conducted using 

a convenience sample drawn from a 

large, national consumer panel of about 

one million households. 

Participants will be adults, age 18 and 

older, who are recruited for a study 

about foods and food labels. Each 

participant will be randomly assigned to 

1 of the 54 experimental conditions 

derived from fully crossing 8 possible 

footnotes/cueing schemes, 3 product 

types, and 2 prior knowledge 

conditions. 

FDA will use the information from the 

experimental study to evaluate 

regulatory and policy options. The 

agency often lacks empirical data about 

how consumers understand and 

respond to statements they might see in 

product labeling. The information 

gathered from this experimental study 

will be used to estimate consumer 

comprehension and the behavioral 

impact of various footnotes and cueing 

schemes intended to help consumers 

better understand quantitative trans fat 

information. 

The experimental study data will be 

collected using participants of an 

Internet panel of approximately one 

million people. Participation in the 

experimental study is voluntary. 

In the Federal Register of February 6, 

2006 (71 FR 6079), FDA published a 60- 

day notice requesting public comment 

on the information collection that will 

take place as part of the experimental 

study. FDA received two letters in 

response to the notice, each containing 

multiple comments. 

(Comment 1) One comment stated 

that the organization concurs with the 

objectives of the study and believes the 

information from this study will be 

useful to FDA in developing labeling 

policy to assist consumers with 

interpretation of trans fat claims in food 

labeling. Another comment expressed 

concern that the NFP of only one of the 

three product pairs (margarine) showed 

polyunsaturated fat and 

monounsaturated fat content and 

recommended that the NFPs for all three 

products tested in the study show the 

fuller fat profile. 

(Response) FDA disagrees with the 

recommendation that the NFPs for all 

three products tested in the study 

disclose a fuller fat profile. Most NFPs 

do not include the optional 

polyunsaturated fat and 

monounsaturated fat content. Typically, 

this information is disclosed on NFPs 

for products that are entirely or largely 

composed of fat (e.g., butter, margarine, 

and cooking oils). In these cases, the fat 

profile may be shown in greater detail 

because consumers may use this 

information to select among alternative 

food products. The NFPs for the product 

pairs tested in the study are consistent 

with actual donut, margarine, and 

frozen lasagna labels. Because the 

recommended change would limit 

products tested in the study to those 

such as butter, margarine, and cooking 

oils, FDA will retain the NFPs as 

proposed. 

(Comment 2) One comment suggested 

that the NFPs should not reflect 

rounding, to minimize potential 

consumer confusion. The comment 

specifically recommended that FDA edit 

the study NFPs containing declarations 

of polyunsaturated and 

monounsaturated fats (i.e., for the 

margarine product pair) to declare total 

fat grams in an amount equal to the sum 

of the four listed fatty acids. 

(Response) FDA agrees that for the 

margarine labels, which include the four 

fatty acids under total fat, the fatty acids 

gram (g) amounts declared should add 

up to the total fat gram amount to avoid 

raising questions or distracting the 

participants in the margarine 

conditions. We made the requested 

change. 

(Comment 3) One comment suggested 

that, for the margarine labels, FDA 

should edit the polyunsaturated and 

monounsaturated values to be as equal 

as possible in the product pairings to 

ensure that the focus is on the saturated 

fat and trans fat content. 

(Response) FDA disagrees with the 

suggested change to the NFPs for the 

margarine product pairs. In order to 

keep the values for the polyunsaturated 

and monounsaturated fats identical in 

the margarine pairs, the saturated fat 

content would become unrealistically 

high in one label because it is the only 

fat component that could increase when 

trans fat equals zero. FDA will retain the 

NFPs as proposed. 

(Comment 4) One comment noted that 

only one of the NFPs for the three 

products tested in the study showed 

some cholesterol present in the product; 

the other two products disclosed 

cholesterol as zero. In particular, the 

comment identified lasagna as unlikely 

to contain 0 milligrams of cholesterol. 

(Response) FDA agrees that zero 

cholesterol is not likely to be a realistic 

amount of cholesterol disclosed on a 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
10222 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 44 / Wednesday, March 7, 2007 / Notices 

NFP for a lasagna product and has 

revised the NFPs for the lasagna pairs. 

In addition, FDA changed a product 

category from cookies to donuts edited 

and the NFPs for the new donut product 

pair to add a disclosure of cholesterol. 

(Comment 5) One comment critiqued 

the draft Full Information treatment 

language. The comment criticized the 

one-page summary because: (1) It did 

not identify calories in the discussion of 

fat as a major source of energy and (2) 

it did not relate the calorie contribution 

of fat to that of carbohydrates and 

protein. The comment also criticized the 

information about sources of trans fat 

because it omitted mention of natural 

sources of trans fat in the diet, which 

the comment suggested would help 

ensure factually correct and balanced 

information about sources of trans in the 

diet. The comment questioned the value 

of stating that trans fat extends shelflife 

and has desirable taste characteristics 

since many saturated fat sources are 

relatively shelf stable and have desirable 

taste characteristics. 

(Response) FDA agrees and has 

revised the Full Information treatment 

in response to these concerns. Calories 

and other sources of energy are now 

mentioned in the introductory passage. 

Natural sources of trans fat are now 

mentioned and the similarity between 

trans fat and saturated fat in terms of 

shelflife and taste are now addressed. 

The revised draft will be included in the 

study pretest and further revisions will 

be made if FDA determines they are 

needed based upon pretest results. 

(Comment 6) One comment suggested 

consumer confusion may be caused 

when a NFP for a product discloses 0g 

of trans fat but the ingredient list 

discloses an ingredient that contains 

trans fat, as is permitted by the trans fat 

labeling regulations. The comment 

concluded that FDA should add 

experimental conditions in which this 

occurs. The comment suggested that for 

this situation the study should test 

language for a footnote to the ingredient 

list to explain that there may be a trans 

fat ingredient in the product when the 

NFP shows trans fat as zero. 

(Response) FDA disagrees with the 

proposed addition to the study’s 

experimental conditions. Under existing 

trans fat labeling regulations, food 

manufacturers are allowed to list 

amounts of trans fat less than 0.5 g per 

serving as zero on the NFP. While such 

situations occur in the marketplace and 

are permitted by the trans fat labeling 

regulations, whether this causes 

consumer confusion is an issue outside 

the scope of the proposed research, 

which focuses on the effects of NFP 

footnotes and alternative presentations 

of trans fat information in the NFP on 

consumers’ ability to correctly identify 

more healthful food products. The 

Office of Nutritional Products, Labeling, 

and Dietary Supplements has received 

and responded to a separate letter on 

this topic from the commenter. 

TABLE 1.—ESTIMATED ANNUAL REPORTING BURDEN1

Activity No. of 

Respondents 

Annual Frequency 

per Response 

Total Annual 

Responses 

Hours per 

Response Total Hours 

Pretest 40 1 40 .25 10 

Study 3,240 1 3,240 .25 810 

Total 820 

1There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information. 

Dated: February 28, 2007. 

Jeffrey Shuren, 

Associate Commissioner for Policy. 

[FR Doc. E7–3904 Filed 3–6–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4160–01–S 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Food and Drug Administration 

[Docket No. 2006N–0357] 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; Submission for Office of 

Management and Budget Review; 

Comment Request; Procedures for the 

Safe and Sanitary Processing and 

Importing of Fish and Fishery Products 

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 April 6, 

2007. 

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: 

202–395–6974. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jonna Capezzuto, Office of the Chief 

Information Officer (HFA–250), Food 

and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers 

Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, 301–827–

4659. 

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. 

Procedures for the Safe and Sanitary 

Processing and Importing of Fish and 

Fishery Products—21 CFR Part 123 

(OMB Control Number 0910–0354)—

Extension 

FDA regulations in part 123 (21 CFR 

part 123) mandate the application of 

hazard analysis and critical control 

point (HACCP) principles to the 

processing of seafood. HACCP is a 

preventive system of hazard control 

designed to help ensure the safety of 

foods. The regulations were issued 

under FDA’s statutory authority to 

regulate food safety, including section 

402(a)(1) and (a)(4) of the Federal Food, 

Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 

342(a)(1) and (a)(4)), and became 

effective on December 18, 1997. 

Certain provisions in part 123 require 

that processors and importers of seafood 

collect and record information. The 

HACCP records compiled and 

maintained by a seafood processor 

primarily consist of the periodic 

observations recorded at selected 

monitoring points during processing 

and packaging operations, as called for 

in a processor’s HACCP plan (e.g., the 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES