29102 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 121 / Friday, June 22, 2018 / Notices 

III. Data 

OMB Control Number: 0648–xxxx. 

Form Number(s): None. 

Type of Review: Regular (request for a 

new information collection). 

Affected Public: Business or other forprofit organizations; Federal 

Government; State, Local, or Tribal 

Government. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

10–15 people per focus group, 3–4 focus 

groups per location, 6 locations (180– 

360 Total respondents). 

Estimated Time per Response: Each 

focus group will last 3–4 hours. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden 

Hours: 1,450. 

Estimated Total Annual Cost to 

Public: $0 in recordkeeping/reporting 

costs. 

IV. Request for Comments 

Comments are invited on: (a) Whether 

the proposed collection of information 

is necessary for the proper performance 

of the functions of the agency, including 

whether the information shall have 

practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the 

agency’s estimate of the burden 

(including hours and cost) of the 

proposed collection of information; (c) 

ways to enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and (d) ways to minimize the 

burden of the collection of information 

on respondents, including through the 

use of automated collection techniques 

or other forms of information 

technology. 

Comments submitted in response to 

this notice will be summarized and/or 

included in the request for OMB 

approval of this information collection; 

they also will become a matter of public 

record. 

Dated: June 18, 2018. 

Sarah Brabson, 

NOAA PRA Clearance Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2018–13467 Filed 6–21–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–KE–P 

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket No. CPSC–2017–0027] 

Recall Effectiveness: Announcement 

of Request for Information Regarding 

the Use of Direct Notice and Targeted 

Notices During Recalls 

AGENCY: U.S. Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice of request for 

information. 

SUMMARY: To advance the concepts 

discussed during the U.S. Consumer 

Product Safety Commission’s (CPSC) 

Recall Effectiveness Workshop in 2017, 

the CPSC announces a Request for 

Information (RFI) from stakeholders to 

provide information critical to future 

work on Recall Effectiveness. CPSC asks 

for responses on a series of questions 

addressing direct notice and other forms 

of customer notice. The information 

provided will help inform CPSC’s 

efforts to continue improving the 

effectiveness of recalls. 

DATES: Submit comments by September 

5, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by Docket No. CPSC–2017– 

0027, by any of the following methods: 

Electronic Submissions: Submit 

electronic comments to the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at: 

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; 

however, please do not use this method 

if you are submitting confidential 

business information or other sensitive 

information that should not be made 

public. 

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: 

www.regulations.gov. If you submit 

confidential business information, trade 

secret information, or other sensitive or 

protected information that you do not 

want to be available to the public, do 

not submit it electronically, but send it 

in hard copy to the Office of the 

Secretary at the address indicated 

above. See also section III, below. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received, go to: 

www.regulations.gov, and insert the 

docket number CPSC–2017–0027, into 

the ‘‘Search’’ box, and follow the 

prompts. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Joseph F. Williams, Compliance Officer, 

the Office of Compliance and Field 

Operations, U.S. Consumer Product 

Safety Commission, 4330 East-West 

Hwy., Bethesda, MD 20814; telephone: 

301–504–7585; email: jfwilliams@

cpsc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

A. Recall Effectiveness Workshop 

On July 25, 2017, the CPSC hosted a 

Recall Effectiveness Workshop. The goal 

of the workshop was to explore and 

develop proactive measures that CPSC 

and stakeholders can undertake to 

improve recall effectiveness. Seventynine external stakeholders attended the 

workshop, including various retailers, 

manufacturers, law firms, consumer 

interest groups, third party recall 

contractors and consultants, testing 

laboratories, and other interested 

parties. CPSC staff facilitated an open 

discussion among these participants 

about ways to increase recall 

effectiveness and also gathered feedback 

on how CPSC can potentially improve 

its recall efforts. Additional details may 

be found here: https://www.cpsc.gov/ 

Recall-Effectiveness. 

B. Recall Effectiveness Report 

Following the workshop, CPSC staff 

prepared a report, which was released 

on February 22, 2018. The report stated 

that the CPSC staff intends to prioritize 

stakeholders’ suggestions to: 

• Collaborate on ways to improve 

direct notice to consumers; and 

• collaborate with firms to explore 

how technology can be used to enhance 

recall response. 

The report explained the reason for 

this focus: 

‘‘Direct notice recalls have proven to 

be the most effective recalls. We intend 

to work with consumer and industry 

stakeholders on registration methods or 

other improvements (e.g., retailer opt-in 

at checkout, home voice assistants, 

photo texting, QR codes, and incentives 

for product registration) to promote 

direct notice recalls.’’ 

‘‘We will continue to explore how 

technology can be used to enhance 

recall response in appropriate cases, 

including enhancing firms’ recall 

marketing strategies, use of social 

media, and improved methods for instore communication. We intend to 

identify and share examples of future 

recall marketing strategies that are 

innovative and/or successful.’’ 

The full Recall Effectiveness Report 

may be found here: https://

www.cpsc.gov/s3fs-public/Recall_

Effectiveness_Workshop_Report2018.pdf?R1VyLltrl8M_id.2vkAkl

HoUZjaSCab. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 121 / Friday, June 22, 2018 / Notices 29103 

II. Information Requested 

The CPSC seeks information on 

current methods and systems that 

recalling firms use to assist in providing 

direct notice to consumers. The CPSC 

also requests certain information 

regarding the use of targeted notices to 

reach consumers who may have 

purchased a recalled product. 

A. Direct Notice 

1. What methods are available for 

directly notifying consumers of recalls 

(e.g., mail, email, text)? 

2. If you use direct notice for recalls, 

what response rates do you achieve? Do 

the response rates differ significantly for 

different recalls? If so, what factors 

appear to influence the response rates? 

Do you follow up with additional direct 

notice if a customer does not respond? 

How often? For how long? 

3. Do other companies or your 

company use all available direct notice 

methods during every product recall? If 

not, why not? 

4. Do e-commerce retailers/third party 

platforms use direct notice capabilities 

for every recall of products sold through 

their site/platform? If not, why not? 

5. What costs are associated with 

direct notice? How do costs vary for 

different forms of notice? What other 

factors affect cost? 

6. What challenges and barriers 

prevent companies from pursuing or 

improving direct notice? Please address: 

a. Legal barriers 

b. Technological challenges 

c. Privacy challenges 

d. Security challenges 

e. Cost challenges 

f. Other challenges 

7. What technologies exist or are 

being developed that would assist a 

recalling company to acquire direct 

contact information or capabilities to 

contact purchasers and/or issue direct 

notice for recalls? 

8. What methods do you use to collect 

direct contact information at the point 

of sale? 

9. Does your attempt to collect direct 

contact information depend on the 

item(s) purchased? Is the cost of the 

item at all relevant? 

10. Have you worked with a thirdparty entity (e.g., credit card or payment 

processing companies, product 

registries, data collection platforms, 

online retailers) to identify or contact 

consumers who previously purchased a 

product subject to a recall? If so, how, 

and with what types of companies did 

you work? 

11. For retailers that have information 

on their customers (e.g., retail credit/ 

debit cards, loyalty program, 

membership registration), can such 

information be accessed through 

purchase data to provide direct notice? 

12. What would make direct notice 

more effective (e.g., notice type, number 

of touches)? 

13. How can the CPSC help facilitate 

direct notice to consumers? 

14. What can we learn from marketing 

efforts (e.g., needed resources, personnel 

qualifications, channels of 

communication, evaluating messaging 

effectiveness, etc.) to better reach 

consumers for recall purposes? 

B. Product Registration 

1. What product registration methods 

are used today to collect consumer 

information and track purchased/ 

registered products? 

2. Why do companies offer product 

registration? Are product registration 

programs due to mandatory 

requirements by CPSC or other agencies, 

or for other reasons? 

3. What are participation rates in 

product registration? Do you see 

significant differences in the registration 

rates for different types of products? 

4. What type of information is 

collected during product registration? 

5. Is product registration more or less 

successful if marketing information is 

not collected at the same time? Why? 

6. What methods are in use or are 

being developed to increase responses 

to product registration (e.g., warranties, 

incentives, voice assistant technology)? 

7. When does the personal 

information collected for product 

registration get used for marketing 

purposes? 

a. Are opt-in/opt-out choices provided 

to consumers for marketing? Describe. 

8. What technologies exist or are 

being developed to advance product 

registration? 

9. What would make product 

registration more effective? 

10. How can the CPSC help facilitate 

or improve product registration rates? 

11. Has the ability to register a 

product online or electronically had an 

effect on the volume of consumer 

response to product registration? 

C. Targeted Notice 

A targeted notice is a notice aimed at 

a particular group of likely affected 

consumers, but not at a known 

purchaser or consumer like direct notice 

(e.g., targeted search engine ads, paid 

social media, micro marketing, such as 

internet radio and targeted use of voice 

assistant technologies). 

1. Have you used any of the targeted 

methods listed above or others to reach 

consumers? What success have you 

seen? 

2. Do companies use the information 

previously collected to assist in issuing 

targeted recall notices when announcing 

recalls? 

3. What costs are generally associated 

with targeted methods, including 

targeted search engine ads, paid social 

media, micro marketing, such as 

internet radio, and voice assistant 

technologies? 

4. What challenges and barriers 

prevent companies from pursuing 

targeted notices for recalls? Please 

address: 

a. Legal barriers 

b. Technological challenges 

c. Privacy challenges 

d. Security challenges 

e. Cost challenges 

f. Other challenges 

5. What technologies exist or are 

being developed that can improve the 

effectiveness of targeted notice? 

6. How can the CPSC help facilitate 

new or improved targeted recall notice 

campaigns? 

7. Are there other forms of recall 

notice that are worth exploring for more 

discussion? 

D. For Consumers and Other 

Stakeholders 

1. Would you be interested in working 

directly with the CPSC to explore best 

practices for implementing product 

registration, improving current direct 

notice capabilities, or developing 

targeted notices? 

2. Are there data showing what forms, 

types, and frequency of messaging 

consumers are most likely to respond to 

in direct and targeted notices? 

3. How can companies incentivize 

consumers to register their products or 

to provide the information needed for 

direct notice in the event of a recall? 

4. What concerns do consumers have 

regarding the use of their personal 

information for recall notification 

purposes? What can firms do to 

overcome these concerns? 

III. Confidentiality 

All data submitted is subject to 

Section 6 of the Consumer Product 

Safety Act (15 U.S.C. Section 2055) and 

may be considered confidential, except 

to the extent otherwise provided by law. 

Please identify any portion of your 

submission that you believe is 

confidential. 

Alberta E. Mills, 

Secretary, Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2018–13388 Filed 6–21–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6355–01–P 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES