6602 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 2000 / Notices

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve

System, February 4, 2000.

Robert deV. Frierson,

Associate Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 00–3029 Filed 2–9–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210–01–P

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

Advisory Committee on Online Access

and Security

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.

ACTION: Notice of meeting on February

25, 2000.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of

the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5

U.S.C. App. § 10(a)(2), and 16 CFR

16.9(a), notice is hereby given that the

Federal Trade Commission Advisory

Committee on Online Access and

Security will hold a meeting on Friday,

February 25, 2000, from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.

in Room 432, Federal Trade

Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue,

NW., Washington, DC 20580. The

meeting is open to the public and will

include a period for public comment.

The purpose of the Advisory Committee

is to provide advice and

recommendations to the Commission

regarding implementation of certain fair

information practices by domestic

commercial Web sites—specifically,

providing online consumers reasonable

access to personal information collected

from and about them, and maintaining

adequate security for that information.

Interested parties may submit comments

concerning any matter to be considered

at the meeting by following the

procedures described below.

DATES: The Advisory Committee will

meet on Friday, February 25, 2000, from

9 a.m. to 5 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will take place

in Room 432, Federal Trade

Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue,

NW., Washington, DC 20580.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Laura Mazzarella, Division of Financial

Practices, Federal Trade Commission,

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Mail

Stop 4429, Washington, DC 20580,

telephone (202) 326–3424, email

lmazzarella@ftc.gov; or Hannah Stires,

Division of Financial Practices, Federal

Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania

Avenue, NW., Mail Stop 4429,

Washington, DC 20580, telephone (202)

326–3178, email hstires@ftc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 41 et seq.; 5 U.S.C.

App. §§ 1–15; 16 CFR part 16.

The second meeting of the Federal

Trade Commission Advisory Committee

on Online Access and Security will be

held on Friday, February 25, 2000, in

Room 432, Federal Trade Commission,

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,

Washington, DC from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.

The Advisory Committee will

consider the costs and benefits, to both

consumers and businesses, of

implementing the fair information

practices of access and security with

respect to personal information

collected for and about consumers

online. The Advisory Committee will

further consider the parameters of

reasonable access to personal

information and adequate security and

will present options for implementation

of these information practices in a

report to the Commission.

The tentative agenda for the second

meeting is as follows:

1. Administrative matters.

2. Discussion of preliminary draft

outlines submitted by subgroups on

issues relating to ‘‘reasonable access’’.

3. Discussion of preliminary draft

outlines submitted by subgroups on

issues relating to ‘‘adequate security’’.

4. Public Comment.

5. Discussion of tasks and

assignments.

The meeting is open to the public.

Submission of Documents

Interested parties who wish to submit

comments on the meeting agenda or

questions for consideration by the

Advisory Committee should send an

original and two copies in advance of

the meeting to the Secretary, Federal

Trade Commission, Room H–159, 600

Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,

Washington, DC 20580. All comments

and questions should be captioned

‘‘Advisory Committee on Online Access

and Security—Comment, P004807.’’ To

enable prompt review and public

access, paper submissions should be

accompanied by a version on diskette in

ASCII, WordPerfect (please specify

version) or Microsoft Word (please

specify version) format. Diskettes

should be labeled with the name of the

submitter, the Advisory Committee

caption, and the name and version of

the word processing program used to

create the document.

Alternatively, comments or questions

may be submitted to the following email

address: advisorycommittee@ftc.gov; if

submitted by email, only one copy of

the comment or question is required.

The email should contain the name of

the submitter, the Advisory Committee

caption, and, if a document is attached,

the name and version of the word

processing program used to create the

document.

To ensure that comments are

processed properly, individuals

submitting comments should be sure to

use the above addresses. All comments

will be posted on the Advisory

Committee’s Web page at www.ftc.gov/

acoas as soon as reasonably possible,

and likely within 5 business days of

receipt.

By direction of the Commission.

Donald S. Clark,

Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 00–3085 Filed 2–9–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6750–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention

[60Day–00–23]

Proposed Data Collections Submitted

for Public Comment and

Recommendations

In compliance with the requirement

of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 for

opportunity for public comment on

proposed data collection projects, the

Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC) will publish periodic

summaries of proposed projects. To

request more information on the

proposed projects or to obtain a copy of

the data collection plans and

instruments, call the CDC Reports

Clearance Officer on (404) 639–7090.

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 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

for other forms of information

technology. Send comments to Seleda

Perryman, CDC Assistant Reports

Clearance Officer, 1600 Clifton Road,

MS–D24, Atlanta, GA 30333. Written

comments should be received within 60

days of this notice.

Proposed Project

Preventing Latex Allergy Among NonHealthcare Workers—New—The

mission of the National Institute for

Occupational Safety and Health

(NIOSH) is to promote ‘‘safety and

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 2000 / Notices 6603

health at work for all people through

research and prevention.’’ In order to

carry out this goal effectively and

efficiently, NIOSH and the occupational

safety and health community

implemented the National Occupational

Research Agenda (NORA) in 1996.

NORA is the first step in an ongoing,

synergistic effort by the various

institutions of the occupational safety

and health community to identify and

research the most important workplace

safety and health issues. In order to

accomplish the NORA objectives in

preventing latex allergy, NIOSH is

conducting health communication

research to determine the most effective

means of communicating the NIOSH

recommendations for preventing latex

allergy.

Allergy to natural rubber latex (NRL)

has become a significant health risk

among healthcare workers and other

persons using latex gloves in the course

of their work [NIOSH 1997; Turjanmaa

et al. 1996; Watts et al. 1998]. A number

of studies indicate that levels of latex

sensitization in healthcare workers

ranges from 5–12% [Liss and Sussman

1999]. One study indicated that the

prevalence of latex sensitivity among

1,351 healthcare workers was 12.1%;

and of that same 1,351 workers, 60%

reported work-related symptoms [Liss et

al. 1997]. Despite the numerous studies

performed in this population, little is

known about the non-healthcare worker

occupations. Occupational asthma and

symptoms of latex allergy have been

reported in select groups including

hairdressers, workers at a latex glove

manufacturing plant, and workers at a

latex doll manufacturing plant.

Prevalence rates up to 11% have been

reported in these studies (11% and 9%,

respectively, in the latter two studies)

[Orfan et al. 1994; Tarlo et al. 1990; van

der Walle and Brunsveld 1995).

Although the prevalence rate for other

non-healthcare worker populations is

unknown, these studies indicate that

workers exposed to latex gloves or

products containing latex may also be at

risk for latex allergy.

In 1997, NIOSH published an ALERT

concerning the risk of latex allergy in

the workplace [NIOSH 1997]. This Alert

provided specific recommendations to

workers for the prevention of latex

allergy and was distributed to

workplaces most likely to contain latex

exposure (i.e., care establishments).

Since occupations reporting less

frequent use of latex gloves or exposure

to latex-containing products may also be

at risk for latex allergy, it is important

to design appropriate health

interventions for these occupational

groups as well. Therefore, the overall

objective of this study is to develop a

health intervention that (1) effectively

communicates the NIOSH

recommendations for preventing latex

allergy to the appropriate, at-risk nonhealthcare worker occupations and (2)

promotes the use of the

recommendations through

corresponding attitude and behavior

change.

To accomplish this task, we propose

to conduct a systematic, communication

theory-based set of studies with a

brochure adapted from the NIOSH Alert

on latex allergy as the primary attitude

concept. These experiments will be

targeted at five non-healthcare worker

occupational groups (hair dressers,

daycare workers, police officers, food

handlers, and housekeeping personnel).

The framing postulate of the Prospect

Theory and the Elaboration Likelihood

Model will serve as the basis of the

study [Tversky and Kahneman 1981;

Petty and Cacioppo 1986] in which the

combined effect of message framing and

message expectancy on elaboration

likelihood will be assessed. Specifically,

participants will be randomly assigned

to the conditions of a 2 (message

framing: positive vs. negative) ′ 2

(message expectancy: positive vs.

negative) ′ 2 (argument quality: strong

vs. stronger) factorial design and given

a pretest, brochure with the appropriate

test variables, and post test. In addition,

the participants will be surveyed for a

history of latex glove usage, allergy,

latex allergy, or dermatitis in either

themselves or their family members to

determine if a history of allergy or glove

usage predisposes them to be highly

involved with the subject of latex

allergy. Finally, the effect of the

intervention on receiver attitude toward

latex allergy and corresponding use of

NIOSH recommendations one month

following the intervention will be

determined. The study will include

several phases. First, effective

communication variables will be

identified in the pretesting phase and

incorporated into test brochures. In

addition, pre-test and post-test surveys

will be pretested. A total of 160

participants will be recruited for the

pretesting phase. In the second phase,

the pilot test, the effect of message

framing and message expectancy on

elaboration likelihood will be assessed

in a small scale, laboratory study. This

pilot test will be conducted with a

sample of university students (N = 300)

who occasionally to intermittently wear

latex gloves. Conducting the first study

in the laboratory setting allows for

consistent control over external

variables during message pretesting,

implementation, and testing. The

knowledge obtained from this study will

be used to improve the versions of the

brochure to be used in the last phase,

one study for each of the five

occupational groups (a total of five

studies). The goal of each study will be

to determine the effect of message

framing and message expectancy

manipulations in increasing the

receiver’s elaboration about latex allergy

prevention among five different

occupational groups (N = 300 per group

or 1,500 total participants). In addition,

change in attitude and behavior will be

assessed one month after exposure to

the brochure. These combined studies

will test the use of message framing and

contrasts in message expectancy in

applied health communication research.

Specifically, the studies will assess the

effectiveness of these communication

variables in influencing attitude,

intentions, and behavior concerning the

prevention of latex allergy. The results

and conclusions drawn from this project

will be used to develop a health

communication template based on

message framing and increased

systematic message processing.

Overall, this study will contribute

significantly to the knowledge

concerning application of the message

framing theory, provide NIOSH with

specific recommendations for effective

health communication, and provide a

template for future health interventions.

In addition, this study will identify

effective methods of communicating

health and safety messages to those

populations not normally reached by

NIOSH.

Based on an average hourly wage of

$10.00 among all occupational groups

combined, the total cost to respondents

is $17,450.

Respondents Phases Number of

respondents

Number of

responses/

respondents

Avg. burden

per response (in

hours)

Total burden (in

hours)

Hairdressers, food service personnel, housekeeping

personnel, daycare workers, police officers.

Pretesting Phase I .............. 150 1 .5 75

6604 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 2000 / Notices

Respondents Phases Number of

respondents

Number of

responses/

respondents

Avg. burden

per response (in

hours)

Total burden (in

hours)

Hairdressers, food service personnel, housekeeping

personnel, daycare workers, police officers.

Pretesting Phase II ............. 10 1 2 20

University students .......................................................... Pilot Testing Phase ............ 300 1 .5 150

Hairdressers, food service personnel, housekeeping

personnel, daycare workers, police officers.

Combined Studies .............. 1,500 2 .5 1,500

Totals .................................................................... ............................................. 1,960 .................... .................... 1,745

Dated: February 2, 2000.

Nancy Cheal,

Acting Associate Director for Policy,

Planning, and Evaluation, Centers for Disease

Control and Prevention (CDC).

[FR Doc. 00–3057 Filed 2–9–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4163–18–P

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control And

Prevention

[60Day–00–21]

Proposed Data Collections Submitted

for Public Comment and

Recommendations

In compliance with the requirement

of Section 3506 (c) (2) (A) of the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the

Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention is providing opportunity for

public comment on proposed data

collection projects. To request more

information on the proposed projects or

to obtain a copy of the data collection

plans and instruments, call the CDC

Reports Clearance Officer on (404) 639–

7090.

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 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

for other forms of information

technology. Send comments to Seleda

Perryman, CDC Assistant Reports

Clearance Officer, 1600 Clifton Road,

MS–D24, Atlanta, GA 30333. Written

comments should be received within 60

days of this notice.

Proposed Projects

The Role of Positive and Negative

Emotion in Promoting Hearing

Conservation Behaviors Among Coal

Miners—New—The mission of the

National Institute for Occupational

Safety and Health (NIOSH) is to

promote ‘‘safety and health at work for

all people through research and

prevention.’’ NIOSH investigates and

identifies occupational safety and health

hazards and conducts a variety of

activities, including educational

programs with workers, to help prevent

work-related illness and injury.

One of the most widespread, but often

overlooked, occupational hazards is

noise. As a result, hearing loss is the

most common occupational disease in

the United States today. More than 30

million workers are exposed to

hazardous noise levels.

The risk of hearing loss is particularly

high in certain occupations. Research

shows that more than 90 percent of coal

miners will experience moderate to

significant hearing loss by the time they

reach retirement. This level of hearing

loss has a number of negative

implications for both the affected

individual and others: (1) Impaired

communication with family members,

friends, and coworkers can result in

social isolation; (2) unrelenting tinnitus

(ringing in the ears) can significantly

lower one’s quality of life; (3) a

diminished ability to monitor the work

environment (including warning

signals, etc.) increases the risk of

accidents and further injury at the

workplace; and, finally, (4) there are

economic costs that result from workers’

compensation and lower productivity.

New noise standards for the mining

environment have recently been issued

by the Department of Labor and will go

into effect in September 2000. The new

rules require that mine operators take

necessary action to protect miners’

hearing when noise levels reach 85 dBA

or more over an eight-hour period with

additional actions required at 90 dBA.

While the new standard establishes

mandatory behaviors, such as the

wearing of both ear plug and earmufftype hearing protectors at noise levels of

105 dBA or more over an eight-hour

period, there are also voluntary

behaviors associated with the new rules.

The wearing of hearing protectors at

levels below 90 dBA and getting hearing

tests as part of a hearing conservation

program are both voluntary on the part

of the individual miner.

This study is designed to ascertain

factors that can be used to encourage

adoption of voluntary behaviors among

coal miners. The choice of this subset of

miners is based upon research that

indicates they experience significantly

more hearing loss than metal and

nonmetal miners. NIOSH proposes

working with the United Mine Workers

of America and experts in health

communication to test the effectiveness

of several innovative approaches to

communicating hearing loss risk and

promoting self-protective behaviors.

Different messages will be sent to four

different groups of coal miners, and

there will be one control group that

receives no message. The researchers

will follow up with these groups at two

different points in time to assess the

relative effectiveness of the messages.

The central purpose of this study is to

promote hearing conservation among

coal miners and encourage the adoption

of the voluntary components of the new

noise standard. However, NIOSH

believes that the results of this study

will help in similar efforts with other

worker populations. There is no cost to

respondents.

Respondents Number of

respondents

Number of

responses/respondent

(in hrs.)

Ave. burden

per response

(in hrs.)

Total burden

(in hrs.)

Coal miners in pretest ............................................................................................. 80 1 30/60 40