Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 129 / Wednesday, July 3, 1996 / Notices 34837

Settlement Only ....................................................................................................................................... 100.00 per month.

Facsimile .................................................................................................................................................. 1.75.

Postage ..................................................................................................................................................... At cost.

Photocopy ................................................................................................................................................ 2.25.

Research ................................................................................................................................................... 0.15 plus $12 per hour.

Over the Counter Items ........................................................................................................................... 0.03.

Statement Processing Fees: (all fees per item unless otherwise indicated)

Truncated Statement ............................................................................................................................... $0.08 per statement.

Imaged Statement .................................................................................................................................... 0.12 per statement.

Cycled Statement ..................................................................................................................................... 0.20 per statement.

Per Insert .................................................................................................................................................. 0.01 per insert.

Postage ..................................................................................................................................................... At Cost.

Imaged Check Printing ............................................................................................................................ 0.07 per page.

Statement Data Printing .......................................................................................................................... 0.07 per page.

Maintenance Fee ..................................................................................................................................... 250.0 per month.

DDA Processing Fees: (all fees per item unless otherwise indicated)

Full Cycled .............................................................................................................................................. $0.15.

Full Truncated ......................................................................................................................................... 0.12.

Basic Cycled ............................................................................................................................................ 0.11.

Basic Truncated ....................................................................................................................................... 0.08.

Maintenance Fee ..................................................................................................................................... 25.00 per month.

Debit ......................................................................................................................................................... 0.15.

Credit ........................................................................................................................................................ 0.15.

Large Item Return Notification ............................................................................................................... 3.00.

Research ................................................................................................................................................... 0.15 plus $12 per hour.

Additional Statements ............................................................................................................................ 2.00.

Photocopy ................................................................................................................................................ 2.25.

Facsimile .................................................................................................................................................. 1.75.

Postage ..................................................................................................................................................... At Cost.

Lockbox Processing Fees: (all fees per item unless otherwise indicated)

1–50,000 items per month ...................................................................................................................... $0.110.

50,001–80,000 items per month ............................................................................................................. 0.105.

80,001–120,000 items per month ........................................................................................................... 0.100.

120,001–160,000 items per month ......................................................................................................... 0.095.

160,001–above items per month ............................................................................................................ 0.090.

Processing Fee ......................................................................................................................................... 100.00 per month.

Exception Items ....................................................................................................................................... 0.07.

Photocopy ................................................................................................................................................ 2.25.

Facsimile .................................................................................................................................................. 1.75.

Postage ..................................................................................................................................................... At Cost.

District 11.—Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco (1996 NOW/DDA Services)

(Does not provide item processing services for third party accounts)

District 12.—Federal Home Loan Bank of Seattle (1996 NOW/DDA Services)

(Does not provide item processing services for third party accounts)

By the Federal Housing Finance Board.

Rita I. Fair,

Managing Director.

[FR Doc. 96–16965 Filed 7–2–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6720–01–P

FEDERAL MEDICATION AND

CONCILIATION SERVICE (FMCS)

Office of the Deputy Director;

Submission for OMB Review;

Comment Request

June 27, 1996.

The Federal Mediation and

Conciliation Service (FMCS) has

submitted four information collection

requests to the Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) for review and

approval in accordance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (P.L.

104–13, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). These

forms are: FMCS’ Arbitrator’s Personal

Data Questionnaire (FMCS For R–22),

FMCS’ Request for Arbitration Panel

(FMCS Form R–43), FMCS’ Arbitrator’s

Report and Fee Statement (FMCS Form

R–19), and FMCS’ Notice to Mediation

Agencies (FMCS Form F–7). Copies of

these individual collection requests,

with the appropriate agency form

number, may be obtained by calling

Tammi E. Strozier, Office Manager,

Office of the General Counsel at (202)

606–5442, between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30

p.m., Monday through Friday.

Comments Received

In response to the 60-day notice, no

comments were received for FMCS

Forms R–22, R–43, and R–19. For the

FMCS Form F–7, there were nine nonopposing comments received basically

dealing with the agency’s suggested

change from a quadruplicate form to a

single copy which would require the

filing party to provide photocopies to

the appropriate state agencies and other

parties. Donald G. Russell, Director of

Conciliation of the Indian Education

Employment Relations Board, wrote that

the form looks fine; Melissa McIntosh,

Director, Wage and Hour Division of the
34838 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 129 / Wednesday, July 3, 1996 / Notices

Department of Labor of the State of

Indiana, commented that the costcutting change seems to be a reasonable

and efficient idea; Jan Hart DeYoung,

Hearing Examiner of the Alaska Labor

Relations Agency, Supported FMCS’s

efforts at cost-cutting and said her

agency would not be affected by a

change from a quadruplicate form to a

single form; Patrick A. Fridell, Assistant

Chief UI Legal Section of the Georgia

Department of Labor, stated that a

photocopy is usually what the agency

receives and is adequate; the New Jersey

State Board of Mediation has no

comments; and Catherine J. Serino,

Director of the Connecticut Department

of Labor, had no objections to the

proposed change but note that, ‘‘only

experience will tell if parties notice the

proper agencies, like our Board, without

the multiple copies.’’

Mark A. Lamont, Director of the

Pennsylvania Bureau of Mediation,

Department of Labor and Industry,

suggested the insertion of ‘‘Copies to:

Appropriate State or Territorial Agency,

Opposite Party, and copy to be Retained

by Party Filing Notice should be in

BOLD print as found in the current

format.’’ He also noted that in

Pennsylvania, at least, 85 percent of the

notices were from the quadruplicate

form. Bethanie Jensen, Administrative

Assistant, North Dakota Department of

Labor, suggested that the form contain

more information, e.g. ‘‘actual active

union members covered by the contract,

percent of union members at a site

location, and actual total active union

members at the location affected.’’

FMCS believes that since the TaftHartley Act only requires notification of

contract expiration or modification by

the filing party, this additional

information collection request may

prove too burdensome for the filer,

whether it be the union or employer, to

complete in a timely fashion.

Parker Denaco of the New Hampshire

Public Employee Relations Board, saw

no problems with his agency receiving

photocopies that though that, ‘‘from a

recipient agency standpoint,’’ the

receipt of photocopies instead of

pressure-sensitive copies would assure

clearer copies’’ and ‘‘that it might cause

users to give more consideration as to

when it is actually necessary to send the

state a copy in the first place.’’ Also, he

suggested, ‘‘from an efficiency

standpoint, could you offer an even

more technologically advanced solution,

namely to scan the new and improved

Form 7 into your computer and offer

any entity using the form to send a

blank disc on which you would transfer

the form in one of the common

formats.’’ This ‘‘would allow users/filers

to upload the form into their computer,

fill in the blanks on the screen and then

print the completed form.’’ The user

could have the ‘‘opportunity to fill out,

proof, and print a form all in one

process.’’ FMCS will look into the

feasibility and cost of that approach.

Submission of Comments

Comments about this request should

be submitted to the Office of

Information and Regulatory Affairs,

Attn.: OMB Desk Officer for (FMCS),

Office of Management and Budget,

Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503.

For more information call (202) 395–

7316, within 30 days from the date of

this publication in the Federal Register.

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 the agency, 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;

• Enhance the quality, utility and

clarity of the information to be

collected; and

• 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,

e.g., permitting electronic submission of

responses.

Agency: Federal Mediation and

Conciliation Service.

Title: Arbitrator’s Personal Data

Questionnaire.

OMB Number: 3076–0001.

Agency Number: Form R–22.

Frequency: Once per application and

once per year for updating the

biographical sketch.

Affected Entities: The individuals

who apply for admission to the FMCS

Roster of Arbitrators.

Number of Respondents: 250.

Estimated Time Per Respondent: 11⁄2

hour.

Total Burden Hours: 375.

Total Annualized capital/startup

costs: $0.

Total annual costs (operating/

maintaining systems or purchasing

services): $0.

Description: The Form R–22 is used to

select highly qualified candidates for

the arbitrator roster. The respondents

are private citizens who make

application for appointment to the

FMCS roster.

Agency: Federal Mediation and

Conciliation Service.

Title: Request for Arbitration Panel.

OMB Number: 3076–0002.

Agency Number: Form R–43.

Frequency: On occasion.

Affected Entities: Employers and their

representatives, employees, labor

unions and their representatives who

request arbitration services.

Number of Respondents: 27,000.

Estimated Time Per Respondent: 10

minutes.

Total Burden Hours: 4,500.

Total Annualized capital/startup

costs: $0.

Total annual costs (operating/

maintaining systems or purchasing

services): $0.

Description: The Form R–43 is used

for FMCS to offer panels of arbitrators

for selection by labor and management

to resolve grievances and disagreements

arising under their collective bargaining

agreements (CBAs) and to deal with

fact-finding and interest arbitration

issues as well. The need for this form is

to obtain information, such as name,

address, type of assistance desired, so

that FMCS can provide various

arbitration services effectively and

efficiently (e.g., furnishing a standard

list of seven arbitrators to both labor and

management). This information

collection facilitates the processing of

the parties request for arbitration

assistance.

Agency: Federal Mediation and

Conciliation Service.

Title: Arbitrator’s Report and Fee

Statement.

OMB Number: 3076–0003.

Agency Number: Form R–19.

Frequency: On occasion.

Affected Entities: Individual

arbitrators who render awards under

appointment by the FMCS procedures.

Number of Respondents: 5,000.

Estimated Time Per Respondent: 10

minutes.

Total Burden Hours: 417 hours.

Total Annualized capital/startup

costs: $0.

Total annual costs (operating/

maintaining systems or purchasing

services): $0.

Description: The Form R–19 is used

by FMCS to monitor the work of the

arbitrators who serve on its roster. This

is satisfied through the required

completion of a report and fee statement

which indicates when the arbitration

award was rendered, the file number,

the company and union, the issues,

whether briefs were filed and transcripts

taken, and fees charged to the parties for

days the arbitrators’ services were

utilized. This information is then
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 129 / Wednesday, July 3, 1996 / Notices 34839

contained in the agency’s annual report

to indicate the types of arbitration

issues, the average or median arbitration

fees and days spent on cases, and the

timeliness of the awards rendered.

Agency: Federal Mediation and

Conciliation Service.

Title: Notice to Mediation Agencies.

OMB Number: 3076–0004.

Agency Number: Form F–7.

Frequency: Once per collective

bargaining contract.

Affected Entities: Private sector

employers and labor unions involved in

interstate commerce who file notices for

mediation services to the FMCS and

state, local, and territorial agencies, who

receive copies of these notices filed.

Number of Respondents: 70,000.

Estimated Time Per Respondent: 10

minutes.

Total Burden Hours: 4,167

Total Annualized capital/startup

costs: $0.

Total annual costs (operating/

maintaining systems or purchasing

services): $0.

Description: The F–7 form was

created to establish conformity

throughout interstate commerce and to

allow FMCS to gather desired

information in a uniform manner. The

collection of such information,

including the name of employer or

employer association, address and

phone number, official contact,

bargaining unit and establishment size,

location of affected establishment and

negotiations, industry or type of

business, principal product or service,

union address, phone number, and

official contact, contract expiration date

or renewal date, whether the notice is

filed on behalf of the union or employer,

and whether this is health car industry

notice for initial contracts or existing

contracts, is critical for reporting and

mediation purposes.

Dated: June 27, 1996.

Wilma B. Liebman,

Deputy Director.

[FR Doc. 96–16984 Filed 7–2–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6372–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES

National Science Foundation

Frequently Asked Questions

Concerning the Department of Health

and Human Services Objectivity in

Research Regulations and the National

Science Foundation Investigator

Financial Disclosure Policy

AGENCIES: Public Health Service, and

Office of the Secretary, HHS; National

Science Foundation.

ACTION: Responses to questions.

SUMMARY: This document responds to

frequently asked questions regarding

PHS’ and NSF’s recently-issued rules on

investigator conflicts of interest. This

guidance document is intended to help

institutions implement conflict of

interest policies that comply with both

PHS and NSF requirements.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

PHS: Geoffrey Grant, Acting Director,

Office of Policy for Extramural Research

Administration, National Institutes of

Health, Room 2192, 6701 Rockledge

Drive, MSC 7730, Bethesda MD 20817,

(301) 435–0949. For NSF: Christopher L.

Ashley, Assistant General Counsel,

National Science Foundation, 4201

Wilson Boulevard, Room 1265,

Arlington, VA 22230, (703) 306–1060.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July

11, 1995, the Public Health Service

(PHS) and the Office of the Secretary of

the Department of Health and Human

Services (HHS) and the National

Science Foundation (NSF) issued rules

regarding investigator conflict of

interest. As explained in the preambles

to those rules, PHS and NSF have been

working together to ensure that the rules

impose consistent obligations on

institutions receiving PHS and NSF

funding. To that end, PHS and NSF

announced that the agencies would be

developing a set of questions and

answers (Q&As) to help institutions

implement conflict of interest policies

that comply with both PHS and NSF

requirements. This set of Q&As provides

answers to frequently asked questions

received by both agencies. Where there

are minor differences between the PHS

and NSF rules, they are clearly noted.

Q1: Does NSF or PHS have a

suggested format for investigator

disclosures?

A1: No. The rules are designed to

defer to the expertise of grantee

institutions in developing policies and

supporting documentation.

Q2: May an institution have different

conflict of interest policies that vary

among departments or professional

schools?

A2: Yes, as long as all policies meet

the minimum requirements of the NSF

and PHS rules.

Q3: Which offices within an

institution should be involved in

administering the conflict of interest

rules?

A3: An institution is free to

administer its policy through whatever

office or structure it wishes, as long as

the policy reaches all investigators on

NSF- and PHS-funded projects and the

requirements of the PHS and NSF rules

are met.

Q4: Must institutions routinely

require financial disclosures from

graduate students working on NSF- or

PHS-sponsored research?

A4: The term ‘‘investigator’’ is defined

to encompass individuals ‘‘responsible

for the design, conduct or reporting’’ of

NSF- or PHS-funded research. It is up to

the institution to decide whether

graduate student co-authors are

‘‘responsible for reporting’’ the research.

Q5: Will a proposal be processed if it

does not contain the new certification

required by the NSF and PHS rules?

A5: NSF will not process a proposal

in the absence of the new certification,

but in most cases the institution will not

be required to re-submit the entire

proposal. An addendum page to the

Cover Sheet to the National Science

Foundation (NSF Form 1207) has been

developed that contains the required

certification. The NSF administrative

officer typically will forward a new

certification page to the institution, and

will process the proposal upon receipt

of a completed and executed new page.

The PHS would process the application

without the proper certification but no

award would be made until the

awarding component received the

certification in the form of a signed,

revised application face page.

Q6: Do the PHS and NSF conflict of

interest rules apply to all researchers

and faculty members at institutions that

receive NSF or PHS support?

A6. No. The NSF policy applies only

to grantee institutions that employ more

than fifty persons and the PHS rule

exempts Small Business Innovation

Research (SBIR) and Small Business

Technology Transfer (STTR) Phase I

applications. In those institutions

subject to the NSF policy and/or the

PHS rule, only persons involved in

PHS- or NSF-funded research are

subject to the rules. However,

institutions may choose to cover other

researchers or faculty members under

their policies for institution-specific

reasons.