Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 6, 2010 / Notices 17391 

difference in average monthly seal 

counts since 1993 and harbor seals 

continue to use the haulout site as a 

nursery. There is also no data 

demonstrating stampedes occur at the 

Jenner haulout, thus the potential for 

injury, serious injury or mortality to 

pups from this action is unlikely. 

Finally, the fact that harbor seals pups 

are precocious at birth and form strong 

bonds with mom immediately after birth 

further supports the finding that mom/ 

pup bonds will not be jeopardized due 

to Agency activities. Monitoring data 

suggest that previous breaching events 

have not been the cause of pup 

abandonment. For these reasons, and 

the mitigation measures set forth in the 

IHA, NMFS has determined that no 

Level A harassment (injury), serious 

injury or mortality will occur due to 

Agency activities. 

NMFS compared the Agency’s 

previously documented action of 

breaching the sandbar during one day 

events intermittently since 1995 to the 

possible impacts from limited 2–days 

events. As described above, under the 

IHA, the Agency would be required to 

maintain a one-week recovery period 

between management events, something 

that had not been implemented before. 

Although the management event may 

last 2 days instead of one, NMFS has 

determined that because seals reoccupy 

the beach soon after equipment leaves 

the beach, seals show short- and longterm resilience to chronic disturbance 

(e.g., daily exposure to non-Agency 

related human disturbance, the case of 

the northern elephant seal occupation), 

and the mitigation and monitoring 

measures set forth in the IHA, the shortterm Level B harassment caused by the 

Agency’s water level management 

activities will have a negligible impact 

on harbor seals. California sea lions and 

northern elephant seals are only 

occasionally sighted at the haulout, are 

usually solitary, and do not use the 

haulout for significant behaviors (e.g., 

mating); therefore, the short-term Level 

B harassment caused by the Agency’s 

water level management activities will 

also have a negligible impact on these 

species. 

Based on the analysis contained 

herein on the likely effects of the 

specified activity on marine mammals 

and their habitat, and taking into 

consideration the implementation of the 

mitigation and monitoring measures, 

NMFS finds that the Agency’s water 

level management events will result in 

the incidental take of small numbers of 

marine mammals, by Level B 

harassment only, and that the total 

taking will have a negligible impact on 

the affected species or stocks. There are 

no relevant subsistence uses of marine 

mammals implicated by this action; 

therefore, no impacts to subsistence use 

will occur. 

Endangered Species Act 

No ESA-listed marine mammals are 

known to be present within the action 

area; therefore, ESA consultation is not 

required to issue an MMPA 

authorization for the proposed action. 

However, as described above and in the 

proposed IHA notice, the purpose of the 

modified outlet channel design during 

the lagoon management period is an 

RPA in NMFS’ BiOp on the Agency’s 

Estuary Management Activities for ESAlisted salmonids. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

In compliance with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 

U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), as implemented by 

the regulations published by the 

Council on Environmental Quality (40 

CFR parts 1500–1508), and NOAA 

Administrative Order 216–6, NMFS has 

prepared an Environmental Assessment 

(EA) to consider the direct, indirect and 

cumulative effects to pinnipeds and 

other applicable environmental 

resources resulting from issuance of a 

one-year IHA and the potential issuance 

of additional authorization for 

incidental harassment for the ongoing 

project. NMFS’ EA is separate from but 

relies upon and incorporates the Corps’ 

2005 EA prepared for permitting the 

Agency’s breaching activities. 

Determination 

Based on the description of the 

specified activity, review of monitoring 

data, and the required mitigation and 

monitoring measures described herein, 

NMFS has determined that the Agency’s 

artificial breaching activities will have a 

negligible impact on affected pinniped 

species or stocks and will not have an 

adverse impact on their habitat. 

Subsistence use of marine mammals in 

California does not occur; therefore use 

of marine mammals for subsistence will 

not be affected. 

As such, NMFS has issued the Agency 

a one-year IHA. The issuance of this 

IHA is contingent upon adherence to the 

previously mentioned mitigation, 

monitoring, and reporting requirements. 

Dated: March 30, 2010. 

James H. Lecky, 

Director, Office of Protected Resources, 

National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–7763 Filed 4–1–10; 4:15 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–S 

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY 

COMMISSION 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; Submission for Office of 

Management and Budget Review; 

Comment Request; Follow-Up 

Activities for Product-Related Injuries 

AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Consumer Product Safety 

Commission (CPSC) 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 May 6, 

2010. 

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: CPSC Desk Officer, FAX: 

202–395–6974, or e-mailed to 

oira_submission@omb.eop.gov. Written 

comments should be captioned 

‘‘Product-Related Injuries.’’ All 

comments should be identified with the 

OMB control number 3041–0029. In 

addition, written comments should also 

be submitted by 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 502, 

4330 East-West Highway, Bethesda, MD 

20814; telephone (301) 504–7923. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Linda L. Glatz, Division of Policy and 

Planning, Office of Information 

Technology, Consumer Product Safety 

Commission, 4330 East West Highway, 

Bethesda, MD 20814, (301) 504–7671. 

lglatz@cpsc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 

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

CPSC has submitted the following 

proposed collection of information to 

OMB for review and clearance. Followup Activities for Product-Related 

Injuries (OMB Control Number 3041– 

0029—Extension). 

Section 5(a) of the Consumer Product 

Safety Act, 15 U.S.C. 2054(a), requires 

the Commission to collect information 

related to the causes and prevention of 

death, injury, and illness associated 

with consumer products. That section 

also requires the Commission to 

conduct continuing studies and 

investigations of deaths, injuries, 

diseases, other health impairments, and 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
17392 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 6, 2010 / Notices 

economic losses resulting from 

accidents involving consumer products. 

The Commission obtains information 

about product-related deaths, injuries, 

and illnesses from a variety of sources, 

including newspapers, death 

certificates, consumer complaints, and 

medical facilities. In addition, the 

Commission receives information 

through its internet Web site through 

forms reporting on product-related 

injuries or incidents. 

From these sources, the Commission 

staff selects cases of interest for further 

investigation by face-to-face or 

telephone interviews with persons who 

witnessed or were injured in incidents 

involving consumer products. On-site 

investigations are usually made in cases 

where the Commission staff needs 

photographs of the incident site, the 

product involved, or detailed 

information about the incident. This 

information can come from face-to-face 

interviews with persons who were 

injured or who witnessed the incident, 

as well as contact with state and local 

officials, including police, coroners and 

fire investigators, and others with 

knowledge of the incident. 

The Commission uses this 

information to support development 

and improvement of voluntary 

standards, rulemaking proceedings, 

information and education campaigns, 

and administrative and judicial 

proceedings for enforcement of the 

statutes, standards, and regulations 

administered by the Commission. These 

safety efforts are vitally important to 

help make consumer products safer and 

to remove unsafe products from the 

channels of distribution and from 

consumers’ homes. 

The Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) approved the collection of 

information concerning product-related 

injuries under control number 3041– 

0029. OMB’s most recent extension of 

approval will expire on April 30, 2010. 

The Commission has submitted its 

request for an extension of approval of 

this collection of information to OMB. 

The Commission also operates a 

surveillance system known as the 

National Electronic Injury Surveillance 

System (NEISS) that provides timely 

data on consumer product-related 

injuries treated in a statistically valid 

sample from approximately 100 hospital 

emergency departments, as well as 

childhood poisonings in the United 

States. The NEISS system has been in 

operation since 1971. The Commission 

previously has not included NEISS 

reports under the product-related 

injuries collection of information 

because the information obtained from 

hospital databases are obtained directly 

through CPSC employees and/or CPSC 

contractors, and does not involve the 

solicitation of any information from any 

individuals. The CPSC employee or 

contractor collects emergency 

department records for review which 

are then coded. The PRA exempts facts 

or opinions obtained through direct 

observation by an employee or agent of 

the sponsoring agency. 5 CFR 

1320.3(h)(3). However, because in 

addition to the reports themselves, 

further information may need to be 

obtained which may result in telephone 

and/or face-to-face communications 

with individuals, the proposed 

collection of information under the 

follow-up activities for product-related 

injuries now includes the burden hours 

per year for the NEISS system in 

addition to the other follow-up activities 

conducted by the Commission. 

In the Federal Register of December 1, 

2009 (74 FR 62753), the CPSC published 

a 60-day notice requesting public 

comment on the proposed collection of 

information. No comments were 

received. 

Burden Estimates: The NEISS system 

collects information on consumerproduct related injuries from 

approximately 100 hospitals in the 

United States. Respondents to NEISS 

include hospitals that directly report 

information to NEISS, and hospitals that 

allow access to a CPSC contractor who 

collects the data. In FY2008, there were 

157 NEISS respondents (total hospitals 

and CPSC contractors). These NEISS 

respondents reviewed an estimated 3.4 

million emergency department records 

and reported 371,507 consumer 

product-related injuries and 5,030 

childhood poisoning-related injuries. 

Based on FY2008 data, the total burden 

hours to respondents are estimated to be 

41,497 hours. The average burden hour 

per hospital is 415 hours. However, the 

total burden hour on each hospital 

varies by the size (small or large) and 

location (rural or metropolitan) of the 

hospital. The smallest hospital reported 

less than 200 cases with a burden of 

approximately 100 hours, while the 

largest hospital reported over 16,000 

cases with a burden of about 1,300 

hours. 

The total costs to NEISS respondents 

based on FY2008 data are estimated to 

be $1.5 million per year. NEISS 

respondents enter into contracts with 

CPSC and are compensated for these 

costs. The average cost per respondent 

is estimated to be about $15,000. The 

average cost per burden hour is 

estimated to be $36 per hour (including 

wages and overhead) (Bureau of Labor 

Statistics, June 2009, Total 

Compensation Civilian workers, 

Hospitals). However, the actual cost to 

each respondent varies due to the type 

of respondent (hospital versus CPSC 

contractor), size of hospital, and 

regional differences in wages and 

overhead. Therefore, the actual annual 

cost for any given respondent may vary 

between $2,600 at a small rural hospital 

and $75,000 at a large metropolitan 

hospital which are compensated by the 

CPSC. 

The Commission staff also obtains 

information about incidents involving 

consumer products from approximately 

17,415 persons annually. The staff 

conducts face-to-face interviews at 

incident sites with approximately 915 

persons each year. On average, an onsite interview takes approximately 5 

hours. The staff will also conduct 

approximately 3,500 in-depth 

investigations by telephone. Each indepth telephone investigation requires 

approximately 20 minutes. 

Additionally, the Commission’s hotline 

staff interviews approximately 4,000 

persons each year about incidents 

involving selected consumer products. 

These interviews take an average of 10 

minutes each. Each year, the 

Commission also receives information 

from about 9,000 persons who complete 

forms requesting information about 

product-related incidents or injuries. 

These forms appear on the 

Commission’s internet Web site, http:// 

www.cpsc.gov, and are printed in the 

Consumer Product Safety Review and 

other Commission publications. The 

staff estimates that completion of a form 

takes about 12 minutes. 

The Commission staff estimates that 

this collection of information imposes a 

total annual burden of 7,724 hours on 

all respondents: 4,118 hours for face-toface interviews; 1,155 hours for in-depth 

telephone interviews; 661 hours for 

responses to Hotline interviews; and 

1,790 hours for completion of written 

forms. 

The Commission staff estimates the 

value of the time of respondents to this 

collection of information at $29.31 per 

hour (Bureau of Labor Statistics, June 

2009, Total Compensation, All workers). 

At this valuation, the estimated annual 

cost to the public of this information 

collection will be approximately 

$226,390. 

The annual cost to the federal 

government for this collection of 

information is estimated to be 

approximately $6.4 million per year. 

This estimate includes $1.5 million in 

compensation to NEISS respondents. 

The estimate also includes 

approximately $4.9 million for 354 

professional staff months to oversee 

NEISS operation, prepare 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 6, 2010 / Notices 17393 

questionnaires, interviewer guidelines, 

and other instruments and instructions 

used to collect the information, conduct 

face-to-face and telephone interviews; 

and evaluate responses obtained from 

interviews and completed forms. Each 

staff month is estimated to cost the 

Commission approximately $13,859. 

This is based on an average wage rate of 

$55.97 (the equivalent of a GS–14 Step 

5 employee) with an addition 30 percent 

added for benefits (Bureau of Labor 

Statistics, June 2009, percentage total 

benefits for all civilian management, 

professional, and related employees). 

Dated: March 31, 2010. 

Todd A. Stevenson, 

Secretary, Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2010–7670 Filed 4–5–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6355–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Department of the Army; Corps of 

Engineers 

Intent To Prepare a Draft 

Environmental Impact Statement for 

the ‘‘Flood Control, Mississippi River & 

Tributaries, St. Johns Bayou and New 

Madrid Floodway, Missouri, First 

Phase’’ (SJNM) Project 

AGENCY: Department of the Army, U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers, DoD. 

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare a 

DEIS. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers is announcing its intent to 

prepare a Draft Environmental Impact 

Statement (DEIS) for the Mississippi 

River and Tributaries, St. Johns Bayou 

and New Madrid Floodway, MO Project. 

The DEIS is being prepared to address 

and evaluate the environmental, 

economic and social impacts of 

alternative plans to provide flood 

control and develop and discuss 

locations and methodologies of 

potential compensatory mitigation. This 

DEIS will address previous project 

history, independent external peer 

reviews, State/Federal agency concerns 

and will formulate alternatives that 

manage flood risks in the project area. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Gregg Williams, telephone (901) 544– 

3852, CEMVM–PB–E, 167 North Main 

Street B–202, Memphis, TN 38103– 

1894, e-mail— 

Gregg.W.Williams@usace.army.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The St. 

Johns Bayou Basin and New Madrid 

Floodway are located in the Bootheel 

region of southeast Missouri and 

include all or portions of the New 

Madrid, Scott and Mississippi Counties. 

The basin and floodway are adjacent to 

the Mississippi River, extending from 

the vicinity of Commerce, Missouri to 

New Madrid, Missouri. The basin and 

floodway are subject to both backwater 

and interior headwater flooding. 

Congress authorized the Mississippi 

River and Tributaries (MR&T) Project to 

construct the mainline Mississippi River 

levees. The Birds Point-New Madrid 

Floodway was part of the 1928 Flood 

Control Act. A levee closure and outlet 

structure at New Madrid, Missouri were 

authorized in the Flood Control Act of 

1954 (Pub. L. 780–83) but not 

constructed. The St. Johns Bayou Basin 

levee closure, with drainage structure, 

was authorized in the Flood Control Act 

of 1946, and subsequently constructed. 

An EIS for the MR&T and Channel 

Improvement was filed with the Council 

on Environmental Quality in July 1976, 

which addressed the New Madrid 

Floodway levee closure. The St. Johns 

Bayou/New Madrid Floodway Project 

Final Supplemental Environmental 

Impact Statement (SEIS) was filed with 

the EPA in July 1982. The current 

project was authorized for construction 

by the Water Resources Development 

Act of 1986 (Pub. L. 99–662), section 

401(a). The authorized project is based 

on the Report of the Chief of Engineers, 

dated January 4, 1983, which is part of 

the Phase I General Design 

Memorandum (GDM) documents 

prepared in response to section 101(a) of 

the Water Resources Development Act 

of 1976 (Pub. L. 94–587). A Revised 

Supplemental Environmental Impact 

Statement (RSEIS) was filed in June 

2002. The Revised Supplemental 

Environmental Impact Statement 2 

(RSEIS2) was prepared to clarify the 

record and address concerns related to 

the calculation of compensatory 

mitigation for mid-season fishery 

impacts, hypoxia, cost-benefit analysis, 

Swampbuster and the applicable 

discount rate in the economics analysis. 

The RSEIS2 was filed in March 2006. 

The Corps has determined that a new 

EIS is required to incorporate additional 

scientific and engineering data; include 

the results of intensive independent 

external peer review of the previous 

project document, plans and studies; 

clarify project objectives and plans; and 

address points raised in the course of 

legal action. 

1. Proposed Action: The authorized 

project for the St. Johns Bayou and New 

Madrid Floodway Project consists of 

channel enlargement and improvement 

in the St. Johns Bayou Basin along the 

lower 4.5 miles of the St. Johns Bayou, 

beginning at New Madrid, Missouri, 

then continuing 8.1 miles along the 

Birds Point-New Madrid Setback Levee 

Ditch and ending with 10.8 miles along 

the St. James Ditch. The first item of 

work, consisting of selective clearing 

and snagging, has already been 

completed along a 4.3-mile reach of the 

Setback Levee Ditch beginning at the 

confluence with the St. James Ditch. 

The authorized project also includes a 

1,000-cubic-foot-per-second (CFS) 

pumping station for the St. Johns Bayou 

Basin area, a 1,500-CFS pumping station 

for the New Madrid Floodway area and 

a 1,500-foot-closure levee at the 

southern end of the New Madrid 

Floodway. The channel enlargement 

work and both pumping stations are 

features of the St. Johns Bayou and New 

Madrid Floodway Project and the levee 

closure is a feature of the Mississippi 

River Levee Project. 

2. Alternatives: Alternatives to 

manage flood risks in the project area 

will be considered. Comparisons will be 

made among the alternative plans, 

including the ‘‘no action’’ alternative. 

3. Scoping Process: An intensive 

public involvement program has been 

set up to (1) solicit input from 

individuals and interested parties so 

that problems, needs and opportunities 

within the project area can be properly 

identified and addressed and (2) 

provide status updates to concerned 

organizations and the public. Significant 

issues being analyzed include potential 

project impacts (negative and positive) 

to fisheries, water quality, wetlands, 

waterfowl, shorebirds, endangered 

species and cultural resources. 

Meetings with the local sponsor, 

public coordination meetings, 

interagency environmental meetings 

and public project briefings/ 

presentations will be conducted 

throughout this process. This notice is 

being circulated to Federal, State and 

local environmental resource and 

regulatory agencies; Indian Tribes; nongovernmental organizations; and the 

general public. This notice of intent 

(NOI) will serve as a request for scoping 

input. All interested parties are 

encouraged to participate in the scoping 

process. A public scoping meeting will 

be held on May 11, 2010, at 7 p.m. in 

the East Prairie Church of God, 322 N. 

Washington St., East Prairie, MO 63845. 

It is anticipated that the DEIS will be 

available for public review during 

spring 2012. A public meeting will be 

held during the review period to receive 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES