49730 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 158 / Thursday, August 15, 2013 / Notices 

Conservation Division, Office of 

Protected Resources, National Marine 

Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West 

Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. The 

mailbox address for providing email 

comments is ITP.Nachman@noaa.gov. 

NMFS is not responsible for email 

comments sent to addresses other than 

the one provided here. Comments sent 

via email, including all attachments, 

must not exceed a 25-megabyte file size. 

Instructions: All comments received 

are a part of the public record and will 

generally be posted to http:// 

www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/ 

incidental.htm without change. All 

Personal Identifying Information (for 

example, name, address, etc.) 

voluntarily submitted by the commenter 

may be publicly accessible. Do not 

submit Confidential Business 

Information or otherwise sensitive or 

protected information. 

A copy of the USAF’s application may 

be obtained by visiting the internet at: 

http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/ 

incidental.htm. Documents cited in this 

notice may also be viewed, by 

appointment, during regular business 

hours, at the aforementioned address. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Candace Nachman, Office of Protected 

Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the 

MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct 

the Secretary of Commerce to allow, 

upon request, the incidental, but not 

intentional, taking of small numbers of 

marine mammals by United States 

citizens who engage in a specified 

activity (other than commercial fishing) 

within a specific geographical region if 

certain findings are made and either 

regulations are issued or, if the taking is 

limited to harassment, a notice of a 

proposed authorization is provided to 

the public for review. 

Authorization for incidental takings 

shall be granted if NMFS finds that the 

taking will have a negligible impact on 

the species or stock(s), will not have an 

unmitigable adverse impact on the 

availability of the species or stock(s) for 

subsistence uses (where relevant), and if 

the permissible methods of taking and 

requirements pertaining to the 

mitigation, monitoring and reporting of 

such takings are set forth. NMFS has 

defined ‘‘negligible impact’’ in 50 CFR 

216.103 as ‘‘. . . an impact resulting 

from the specified activity that cannot 

be reasonably expected to, and is not 

reasonably likely to, adversely affect the 

species or stock through effects on 

annual rates of recruitment or survival.’’ 

With respect to military readiness 

activities, the MMPA defines 

‘‘harassment’’ as: ‘‘(i) any act that 

injures or has the significant potential to 

injure a marine mammal stock in the 

wild [Level A Harassment]; or (ii) any 

act that disturbs or is likely to disturb 

a marine mammal or marine mammal 

stock in the wild by causing disruption 

of natural behavioral patterns, 

including, but not limited to, migration, 

surfacing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or 

sheltering, to a point where such 

behavioral patterns are abandoned or 

significantly altered [Level B 

Harassment].’’ 

Summary of Request 

On June 24, 2013, NMFS received an 

application from the USAF requesting a 

letter of authorization (LOA) for the take 

of five species of pinnipeds incidental 

to USAF launch, aircraft, and helicopter 

operations from VAFB launch 

complexes and Delta Mariner 

operations, cargo unloading activities, 

and harbor maintenance dredging in 

support of the Delta IV/EELV launch 

activity on south VAFB. The USAF is 

requesting a 5-year LOA for these 

activities. These activities are classified 

as military readiness activities. The 

USAF states that these activities may 

result in take of marine mammals from 

noise or visual disturbance from rocket 

and missile launches, as well as from 

the use of heavy equipment during the 

Delta Mariner off-loading operations, 

cargo movement activities, increased 

presence of personnel, and harbor 

maintenance dredging. The USAF 

requests to take five pinniped species by 

Level B harassment. 

Description of the Specified Activity 

There are currently six active space 

launch vehicle facilities at VAFB used 

to launch satellites into polar orbit. 

These facilities support launch 

programs for the Atlas V, Delta II, Delta 

IV, Falcon 9, Minotaur, and Taurus. 

There are also a variety of small missiles 

launched from various facilities on 

North VAFB, including the Minuteman 

III and several types of interceptor and 

target vehicles for the Missile Defense 

Agency. The VAFB airfield, located on 

north VAFB, supports various aircraft 

operations. A full description of the 

activities to be conducted by the USAF 

at VAFB, including descriptions of the 

different space vehicles and missiles, 

are described in the USAF’s application. 

Additionally, United Launch Alliance, 

on behalf of the USAF, proposes to 

conduct Delta IV/EELV activities 

(transport vessel operations, harbor 

maintenance dredging, and cargo 

movement activities). These activities 

are described in Appendix A of the 

USAF’s application. 

Information Solicited 

Interested persons may submit 

information, suggestions, and comments 

concerning the USAF’s request (see 

ADDRESSES). All input related to the 

USAF’s request and NMFS’ role in 

governing the incidental taking of 

marine mammals will be considered by 

NMFS when developing, if appropriate, 

the most effective regulations governing 

the issuance of an LOA. 

Dated: August 9, 2013. 

Donna S. Wieting, 

Director, Office of Protected Resources, 

National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2013–19840 Filed 8–14–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

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: The Office of the Secretary must 

receive comments not later than October 

15, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: 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. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 158 / Thursday, August 15, 2013 / Notices 49731 

Written Submissions: Submit written 

submissions in the following way: Mail/ 

Hand delivery/Courier (for paper, disk, 

or CD–ROM submissions), preferably in 

five copies, 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 

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: rsquibb@cpsc.gov. 

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. 

On May 24, 2010, the Commission 

published a proposed rule on the 

Database and announced that a 

proposed collection of information in 

conjunction with the Database had been 

submitted to OMB for review and 

clearance under 44 U.S.C. 3501–3520.75 

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 

approval will expire on January 31, 

2014. 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. 

There are four components to the 

information collection: 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 the Commission) 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 if the report of harm identifies the 

manufacturer or private labeler and the 

CPSC transmits such report of harm to 

the manufacturer. Manufacturers’ 

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, email, mail, or fax. Additionally, 

any person or entity reviewing a report 

of harm or a manufacturer’s comment 

(either before or after publication in the 

Database) and who believes that the 

report contains materially inaccurate 

information, may request that the report 

or comment, or portions of the report or 

comment, be excluded from the 

Database. Such a request may be 

submitted by email, mail, or fax, and 

registered businesses also may utilize 

the business portal for such requests. 

Branding Information: Using the 

business portal, registered businesses 

may voluntarily submit branding 

information to assist CPSC in correctly 

and timely routing reports of harm. 

Brand names may be licensed to an 

entity other than the manufacturer. 

CPSC’s accurate understanding of 

applicable licensing arrangements 

relating to consumer products increases 

the likelihood 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 and receive 

relief from third party testing, a business 

must attest that the company’s total 

gross revenue and the number of units 

of the covered product manufactured 

both fall within the statutory limits. 

C. Estimated Burden 

1. Estimated Annual Burden for 

Respondents 

We estimate the burden of this 

collection of information as follows: 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
49732 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 158 / Thursday, August 15, 2013 / Notices 

1Frequency of responses is calculated by dividing 

the number of responses by the number of 

respondents. 2Numbers have been rounded. 

3U.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, March 2013 (data extracted 

on 07/24/2013 from http://www.bls.gov/ 

news.release/ecec.t09.htm. 

TABLE 1—ESTIMATED ANNUAL REPORTING BURDEN FOR REPORTS OF HARM

Collection type Number of 

respondents 

Response 

frequency 1

Total annual 

responses 

Minutes per 

response 

Total burden, 

in hours 2

Reports of Harm—submitted through Web site .................. 8,030 1.02 8,207 12 1,641 

Reports of Harm—submitted by phone ............................... 3,749 1.00 3,749 10 625 

Reports of Harm—submitted by mail, e-mail, fax ............... 904 6.71 6,067 20 2,022 

Total .............................................................................. 12,683 ........................ 18,023 ........................ 4,288 

TABLE 2—ESTIMATED ANNUAL REPORTING BURDEN FOR MANUFACTURER SUBMISSIONS

Collection type Number of 

respondents 

Response 

frequency 1

Total annual 

responses 

Minutes per 

response 

Total burden, 

in hours 2

Manufacturer Comments—submitted through Web site ..... 624 8.20 5,117 116 9,893 

Manufacturer Comments—submitted by mail, email, fax .... 132 1.25 165 146 402 

Requests to Treat Information as Confidential—submitted 

through Web site .............................................................. 11 1.27 14 15 4 

Requests to Treat Information as Confidential—submitted 

by mail, email, fax ............................................................ 0 0 0 45 0 

Requests to Treat Information as Materially Inaccurate— 

submitted through Web site ............................................. 231 2.46 568 438 4,146 

Requests to Treat Information as Materially Inaccurate— 

submitted by mail, email, fax ........................................... 83 1.25 104 468 811 

Voluntary Brand Identification .............................................. 545 2.25 1,227 10 205 

Small Batch Manufacturer Identification .............................. 578 1 578 10 96 

Total .............................................................................. 2,204 ........................ 7,773 ........................ 15,557 

Using the data in Tables 1 and 2 

above, we estimate the annual reporting 

cost to be $1,086,332. 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 2012. We 

assume that the number of responses 

and respondents will be similar in 

future years. 

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 (1,641 hours + 625 

hours + 2,022 hours = 4,288 hours) by 

an estimated total compensation for all 

workers in private industry of $29.13 

per hour,3 which results in an estimated 

cost of $124,909 (4,288 hours × $29.13 

per hour = $124,909). 

Manufacturer Submissions: Table 2 

sets forth the data used to estimate the 

burden associated with manufacturers’ 

submissions to the Database. To gain 

information on how long it takes a 

manufacturer to submit a general 

comment or a claim that a report 

contains materially inaccurate 

information through the business portal, 

we contacted six businesses registered 

on the business portal. We asked each 

company how long it typically takes to 

research, compose, and enter a comment 

or a claim of materially inaccurate 

information. We had 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 

2012, and then selected two businesses 

from each group to contact. The first 

group we contacted consisted of 

businesses that submitted 50 or more 

comments in FY 2012, accounting for 46 

percent of all general comments 

received. The second group we 

contacted included businesses that 

submitted 6 to 49 comments, accounting 

for 36 percent of all general comments 

received. The last group contacted 

included businesses that submitted no 

more than five comments, accounting 

for 18 percent of all general comments 

received. 

To estimate the burden associated 

with submitting a general comment 

regarding a report of harm through the 

business portal, 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 116 minutes based on 

the data in Table 3 (((10 minutes + 180 

minutes)/2 companies)*.46 + ((10 

minutes + 30 minutes)/2 

companies)*.36 + ((240 minutes + 480 

minutes)/2 companies)*.18 = 116 

minutes). 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 158 / Thursday, August 15, 2013 / Notices 49733 

4U.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, March 2013 (data extracted 

on 07/24/2013 from http://www.bls.gov/ 

news.release/ecec.t09.htm. 

TABLE 3—ESTIMATED BURDEN TO

ENTER A GENERAL COMMENT IN THE

DATABASE

Group Company 

General 

comments 

(minutes) 

Group 1 ..........

(>= 50 comments).

Company A ....

Company B ....

10 

180 

Group 2 ..........

(6–49 comments).

Company A ....

Company B ....

10 

30 

Group 3 ..........

(<= 5 comments).

Company A ....

Company B ....

240 

480 

Registered businesses generally 

submit comments through our Web site. 

Unregistered businesses submit 

comments by mail, email, or fax. We 

estimate that submitting comments in 

this way 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 (116 minutes + 30 

minutes = 146 minutes). 

The submission of a claim of 

materially inaccurate information is a 

relatively rare event for all respondents, 

so we averaged all responses together. 

Four of the businesses contacted had 

submitted claims of materially 

inaccurate information during FY 2012. 

We found that the average time to 

submit a claim that a report of harm 

contains a material inaccuracy is 438 

minutes ((10 minutes + 120 minutes + 

180 minutes + 1440 minutes)/4 

companies = 438 minutes). 

Registered businesses generally 

submit claims through the business 

portal. Unregistered businesses submit 

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 submissions 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 (438 minutes + 30 

minutes = 468 minutes). 

We previously had estimated that 

confidential information claims 

submitted through our Web site would 

take 15 minutes because the information 

to be entered would be readily 

accessible by the respondent. We have 

found that confidential information 

claims are very rare, and the few such 

claims that we have received have been 

submitted through our Web site. That 

limited experience did not suggest the 

need for any update of the estimate for 

Web site submission of confidential 

information claims. Although we have 

not received any confidential 

information claims by mail, email, or 

fax, based on our experience with 

comments and claims of materially 

inaccurate information, 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 (15 

minutes + 30 minutes = 45 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 (15,557 hours) by an 

estimated total compensation for a 

manager or professional in goodsproducing industries of $61.80 per 

hour,4 which results in an estimated 

cost of $961,423 (15,557 hours × $61.80 

per hour = $961,423). 

Therefore, the total estimated annual 

cost to respondents is $1,086,332 

($124,909 burden for reports of harm + 

$961,423 burden for manufacturer 

submissions = $1,086,332). 

2. Estimated Annual Burden on 

Government 

We estimate the annualized cost to 

the CPSC to be $1,028,794. 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 a data entry contract. Tasks related 

to this contract include clerical coding 

of the report, such as identifying the 

type of consumer product reported and 

the appropriate associated hazard, as 

well as performing quality control on 

the data in the report. The contractor 

spends an estimated 3,380 hours per 

year performing these tasks. With an 

hourly rate of $32.57 for contracter 

services, the annual cost to the 

government is $110,087. 

The Reports of Harm category also 

includes sending consent for reports 

when necessary, processing that consent 

when CPSC receives it, determining 

whether a product is out of CPSC’s 

jurisdiction, and checking 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 described in Table 4. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
49734 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 158 / Thursday, August 15, 2013 / Notices 

TABLE 4—ESTIMATED COSTS FOR REPORTS OF HARM TASK

Grade level 

Number of 

hours 

(annual) 

Total 

compensation 

per 

hour 

Total annual 

cost 

Contract ....................................................................................................................................... 3380 $32.57 $110,086.60 

7 ................................................................................................................................................... 1560 33.03 51,526.80 

9 ................................................................................................................................................... 832 40.53 33,720.96 

12 ................................................................................................................................................. 6396 58.78 375,956.88 

13 ................................................................................................................................................. 884 69.67 61,588.28 

14 ................................................................................................................................................. 2053 82.60 169,577.80 

15 ................................................................................................................................................. 421 96.84 40,769.64 

Total ...................................................................................................................................... 12146 ........................ 843,226.96 

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. Detailed costs are described in 

Table 5. 

TABLE 5—ESTIMATED COSTS FOR MII CLAIMS TASK

Grade level 

Number of 

hours 

(annual) 

Total 

compensation 

per 

hour 

Total annual 

cost 

12 ................................................................................................................................................. 364 $58.78 $21,395.92 

13 ................................................................................................................................................. 1040 69.67 72,456.80 

14 ................................................................................................................................................. 378 82.60 31,222.80 

15 ................................................................................................................................................. 151 96.84 14,622.84 

SES .............................................................................................................................................. 104 103.91 10,806.64 

Total ...................................................................................................................................... 2037 ........................ 150,505 

Manufacturer Comments: The 

Comments category includes reviewing 

and accepting or rejecting comments. 

Detailed costs are described in Table 6. 

TABLE 6—ESTIMATED COSTS FOR MANUFACTURER COMMENTS TASK

Grade level 

Number of 

hours 

(annual) 

Total 

compensation 

per 

hour 

Total annual 

cost 

12 ................................................................................................................................................. 104 $58.78 $6,113.12 

13 ................................................................................................................................................. 182 69.67 12,679.94 

Total ...................................................................................................................................... 286 ........................ 18,793.06 

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. 

Detailed costs are described in Table 7. 

TABLE 7—ESTIMATED COSTS FOR SMALL BATCH TASK

Grade level 

Number of 

hours 

(annual) 

Total 

compensation 

per 

hour 

Total annual 

cost 

15 ................................................................................................................................................. 168 $96.84 $16,269.12 

Total ...................................................................................................................................... 168 ........................ 16,269.12 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 158 / Thursday, August 15, 2013 / Notices 49735 

We estimate the annualized cost to the 

CPSC of $1,028,794 by adding the four 

categories of work related to the 

Database summarized in Tables 4 

through 7 (Reports of Harm 

($843,226.96) + MII Claims 

($150,505.00) + Manufacturer 

Comments ($18,793.06) + Small Batch 

Identification ($16,269.12) = 

$1,028,794.14). 

This information collection renewal 

request based on an estimated 19,845 

burden hours per year for the Database 

is a decrease of 17,284 hours since this 

collection of information was last 

approved by OMB in 2011. The decrease 

in burden is due primarily to the fact 

that the number of responses estimated 

in our original request overstated the 

number of actual responses submitted; 

we thus lowered the estimated number 

of responses based on actual experience 

since the original request. 

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, 

particularly with respect to the 

Database, 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: August 12, 2013. 

Todd A. Stevenson, 

Secretary, Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2013–19858 Filed 8–14–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6355–01–P 

CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND 

COMMUNITY SERVICE 

Information Collection; Submission for 

OMB Review, Comment Request 

AGENCY: Corporation for National and 

Community Service. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Corporation for National 

and Community Service (CNCS) has 

submitted a public information 

collection request (ICR) entitled Peer 

Reviewer Application Instructions for 

review and approval in accordance with 

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 

Public Law 104–13, (44 U.S.C. Chapter 

35). Copies of this ICR, with applicable 

supporting documentation, may be 

obtained by calling the Corporation for 

National and Community Service, 

Vielka Garibaldi, at (202) 606–6886 or 

email to vgaribaldi@cns.gov. Individuals 

who use a telecommunications device 

for the deaf (TTY–TDD) may call 1–800– 

833–3722 between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 

p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through 

Friday. 

ADDRESSES: Comments may be 

submitted, identified by the title of the 

information collection activity, to the 

Office of Information and Regulatory 

Affairs, Attn: Ms. Sharon Mar, OMB 

Desk Officer for the Corporation for 

National and Community Service, by 

any of the following two methods 

within 30 days from the date of 

publication in the Federal Register: 

(1) By fax to: (202) 395–6974, 

Attention: Ms. Sharon Mar, OMB Desk 

Officer for the Corporation for National 

and Community Service; or 

(2) By email to: smar@omb.eop.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The OMB 

is particularly interested in comments 

which: 

• Evaluate whether the proposed 

collection of information is necessary 

for the proper performance of the 

functions of CNCS, including whether 

the information will have practical 

utility; 

• Evaluate the accuracy of the 

agency’s estimate of the burden of the 

proposed collection of information, 

including the validity of the 

methodology and assumptions used; 

• Propose ways to enhance the 

quality, utility, and clarity of the 

information to be collected; and 

• Propose ways to minimize the 

burden of the collection of information 

on those who are to respond, including 

through the use of appropriate 

automated, electronic, mechanical, or 

other technological collection 

techniques or other forms of information 

technology. 

Comments 

A 60-day notice requesting public 

comment was published in the Federal 

Register on May 30, 2013. This 

comment period ended July 30, 2013. 

CNCS received no responsive comments 

to the 60-day notice. 

Description: CNCS seeks to renew the 

current information collection. Minor 

revisions are proposed to clarify eGrants 

instructions and reflect adjustments to 

the Corporation for National and 

Community Service eGrants system. The 

information collection will otherwise be 

used in the same manner as the existing 

application. CNCS also seeks to 

continue using the current application 

until the revised application is 

approved by OMB. The current 

application is due to expire on 

September 30, 2013. 

Type of Review: Renewal. 

Agency: Corporation for National and 

Community Service. 

Title: Peer Reviewer Application 

Instructions. 

OMB Number: 3045–0090. 

Agency Number: None. 

Affected Public: Individuals who are 

interested in serving as peer reviewers 

and peer review panel coordinators for 

CNCS. 

Total Respondents: 2,000. 

Frequency: One time to complete. 

Average Time Per Response: Averages 

40 minutes. 

Estimated Total Burden Hours: 1,333 

hours. 

Total Burden Cost (capital/startup): 

None. 

Total Burden Cost (operating/ 

maintenance): None. 

Dated: August 8, 2013. 

Vielka Garibaldi, 

Director, Office of Grants Policy and 

Operations. 

[FR Doc. 2013–19792 Filed 8–14–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6050–28–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Department of the Army; Corps of 

Engineers 

Intent To Prepare a Draft 

Environmental Impact Statement for 

Dam Safety Study, Lake Lewisville 

Dam, Elm Fork Trinity River, Denton 

County, Texas 

AGENCY: Department of the Army, U. S. 

Army Corps of Engineers, DoD. 

ACTION: Notice of intent. 

SUMMARY: Authorized by the River and 

Harbor Act of March 2, 1945, Lake 

Lewisville embankment construction 

began in December 1948 with 

completion in August 1955. The project 

includes an earthen embankment that is 

approximately 32,000 feet in length and 

has a maximum height of 125 feet at 

elevation 560 feet (all elevations are 

NGVD) with gated outlet works and an 

uncontrolled concrete ogee weir 

spillway. The primary purposes of the 

project are flood risk management, 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES