• Publication Date:
  • Publication Type:
  • Fed Register #:
  • Title:
    Submission for OMB Review: Comment Request
[Federal Register: December 21, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 245)][Notices]               [Page 76689-76690]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]



Office of the Secretary
Submission for OMB Review: Comment Request

December 15, 2006.
    The Department of Labor (DOL) has submitted the following public 
information collection requests (ICR) to the Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13, 44 U.S.C. chapter 35). A copy of 
each ICR, with applicable supporting documentation, may be obtained 
from RegInfo.gov at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain or by 
contacting Darrin King on 202-693-4129 (this is not a toll-free number) 
/ e-mail: king.darrin@dol.gov.
    Comments should be sent to Office of Information and Regulatory 
Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for the Occupational Safety and Health 
Administration (OSHA), Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, 
Washington, DC 20503, Telephone: 202-395-7316/Fax: 202-395-6974 (these 
are not a toll-free numbers), 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: Occupational Safety and Health Administration.
    Type of Review: Extension without change of currently approved 
    Title: Ethylene Oxide (EtO) (29 CFR 1910.1047).
    OMB Number: 1218-0108.
    Type of Response: Recordkeeping and Third party disclosure.
    Affected Public: Business or other for-profits.
    Number of Respondents: 5,474.
    Number of Annual Responses: 209,328.
    Estimated Time per Response: Varies by task.
    Total Burden Hours: 42,732.
    Total Annualized capital/startup costs: $0.
    Total Annual Costs (operating/maintaining systems or purchasing 
services): $6,369,781.
    Description: The standard requires employers to monitor employee 
exposure to EtO, to provide medical surveillance, to train employees 
about the hazards of EtO, and to establish and maintain accurate 
records of employee exposure to EtO. These records will be used by 
employers, employees, physicians, and the Government to ensure that 
employees are not harmed by exposure to EtO.
    Agency: Occupational Safety and Health Administration.
    Type of Review: New collection (request for a new OMB control 
    Title: OSHA's Conflict of Interest and Disclosure Form.
    OMB Number: 1218-0NEW.
    Type of Response: Reporting.
    Affected Public: Individuals or Households.
    Number of Respondents: 36.
    Number of Annual Responses: 36.
    Estimated Time per Response: Varies from 30 minutes to 1 hour.
    Total Burden Hours: 27.
    Total Annualized capital/startup costs: $0.
    Total Annual Costs (operating/maintaining systems or purchasing 
services): $0.
    Description: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) published 
the Final Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review on December 15, 
2004. The Bulletin established that important scientific information 
shall be peer reviewed by qualified specialists before it is 
disseminated by the federal government. Peer review is one of the 
important procedures used to ensure that the quality of published 
information meets the standards of the scientific and technical 
community. It is a form of deliberation involving an exchange of 
judgments about the appropriateness of methods and the strength of the 
author's inferences. Peer review involves the review of a draft product 
for quality by specialists in the field who were not involved in 
producing the draft. The selection of participants in a peer review is 
based on expertise, with due consideration of independence and conflict 
of interest. The Bulletin states "* * * the agency must address 
reviewers' potential conflicts of interest (including those stemming 
from ties to regulated businesses and other stakeholders) and 
independence from the agency." The Conflict of Interest and Disclosure 
form will be used to determine whether or not a conflict of interest 
exists for a potential peer review panel member.

Darrin A. King,
Acting Departmental Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. E6-21797 Filed 12-20-06; 8:45 am]