You are on page 1of 2

25574 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No.

92 / Friday, May 13, 2005 / Notices

ESTIMATE OF ANNUALIZED BURDEN HOURS


Number of re- Average bur-
Number of re- Total burden
Respondents sponses per den / response
spondents hours
respondent (in hours)

Written Surveys ............................................................................................... 5000 1 10/60 834

Total .......................................................................................................... ........................ ........................ ........................ 834

Dated: April 6, 2005. Proposed Project can facilitate horizontal information


Joan F. Karr, sharing? (4) Is there utility in creating a
Web-based Reporting Systems for
Acting Reports Clearance Officer, Centers for guidance document to better promote
Tobacco Control: A Nationwide
Disease Control and Prevention. best practices in monitoring system
Assessment—New—The Office on
[FR Doc. 05–9560 Filed 5–12–05; 8:45 am] Smoking and Health (OSH), National development? (5) How can this
Center for Chronic Disease Prevention information be used by the CDC to
BILLING CODE 4163–18–P
and Health Promotion (NCCDPHP), highlight the benefits to public health of
Centers for Disease Control and state level computerized program
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Prevention (CDC). reporting and monitoring systems?
HUMAN SERVICES Roundtable discussions facilitated by
Background and Brief Description
the Office on Smoking and Health with
Centers for Disease Control and Implementation of a Web-based state tobacco control program staff have
Prevention reporting system assessment for the focused on standardized data collection
state health departments’ tobacco for contract management and process
[60Day–05–05BN] control programs. evaluation purposes. Participants
As state health departments strive to expressed frustration that states are
Proposed Data Collections Submitted standardize data collections to better often ‘‘recreating the wheel,’’ with each
for Public Comment and evaluate progress toward strategic goals state developing a unique system
Recommendations and objectives, a movement to develop without the benefit of learning from
web-based reporting systems is states with web-based systems already
In compliance with the requirement sweeping the field of public health. In in production. These discussions
of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the October of 2002, through a Prevention motivated the CDC to explore more
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 for Research Center (PRC) grant, researchers efficient means of sharing lessons
opportunity for public comment on from the University of Minnesota learned about computerized reporting
proposed data collection projects, the conducted a national assessment of systems.
Centers for Disease Control and tobacco control program monitoring The proposed research will build on
Prevention (CDC) will publish periodic practices among state health
the findings of the previous study.
summaries of proposed projects. To departments. Results indicated that all
Enhanced understanding of the
request more information on the states monitor tobacco control program
proliferation, costs and benefits of these
proposed projects or to obtain a copy of activities through either paper or
web-based reporting systems can (1)
the data collection plans and computer-based systems. In 1998, three
improve the capacity of the CDC to
instruments, call 404–371–5983 and states had computerized systems
service state health departments’
send comments to Seleda Perryman, operating, whereas in 2002, thirteen
cooperative agreement technical
CDC Assistant Reports Clearance states had launched systems and
assistance needs, (2) provide a template
Officer, 1600 Clifton Road, MS–D74, twenty-two more were in the planning/
for the CDC as it considers how
Atlanta, GA 30333 or send an e-mail to development stage (Blaine & Petersen,
electronic monitoring systems could be
omb@cdc.gov. presented at National Conference on
expanded to other public health arenas
Tobacco or Health, San Francisco,
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether besides tobacco control, and (3) save
November 20, 2002). Clearly, there is a
the proposed collection of information trend toward developing database state health departments time and
is necessary for the proper performance systems to assess and to monitor state money by using the information gleaned
of the functions of the agency, including tobacco prevention and control from this research to create an
whether the information shall have programs. accessible forum for knowledge sharing.
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the However, recent loss of resources The proposed study has three separate
agency’s estimate of the burden of the available to state tobacco control methodological components: (1) A
proposed collection of information; (c) programs begs several questions: (1) nationwide baseline survey, (2) a
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and How have tightened public health follow-up phone interview with early
clarity of the information to be budgets affected the development of adopters, and (3) select case studies.
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the proposed and in-progress web-based This is a one time only research study.
burden of the collection of information monitoring systems? (2) What can we This tiered research approach will
on respondents, including through the learn from states that have already provide a systematic overview of web-
use of automated collection techniques implemented and upgraded their based reporting systems ranging from
or other forms of information systems that can save time and money the macro-level to the micro-level.
technology. Written comments should for states still in the development Aside from the minimal time needed to
be received within 60 days of this process? (3) How can we institute participate in the interviews, there will
notice. knowledge management systems that be no cost to participants.

VerDate jul<14>2003 19:56 May 12, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13MYN1.SGM 13MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 92 / Friday, May 13, 2005 / Notices 25575

ESTIMATE OF ANNUALIZED BURDEN TABLE


Average
Number of
Number of burden per Total burden
Respondents responses per
respondents response (in hours)
respondent (in hours)

States and DC baseline survey via phone interview ......................................... 51 1 30/60 25.5
Early Adopters focused responses via phone interview ................................... 15 1 1.0 15.0
Case Studies 3 per state X 3 states via site visit ............................................. 9 1 1.5 13.5

Totals .......................................................................................................... ........................ ........................ ........................ 54

Dated: May 6, 2005. Background and Brief Description that contribute to a failing treatment
Joan F. Karr, system.
Acting Reports Clearance Officer, Centers for Epidemiologic evidence strongly links The study will have a cross-sectional
Disease Control and Prevention. ingestion of water containing inorganic component and a temporal component.
[FR Doc. 05–9561 Filed 5–12–05; 8:45 am] arsenic with an increase in bladder For the cross-sectional component, total
cancer and other cancers. In Maine, arsenic, inorganic arsenic species, and
BILLING CODE 4163–18–P
approximately 10% of private domestic selected geochemical constituents will
wells have arsenic concentrations be quantified by the influent and
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND greater than Maine’s health standard for effluent (flowing in and flowing out) of
HUMAN SERVICES water of 10 µg/L. In wells with high filtration devices treating these 100
arsenic concentrations, ingestion of domestic well-water supplies. The study
Centers for Disease Control and water can be the dominant source of team will administer questionnaires to
Prevention arsenic exposure. The preferred method each participating household to collect
for treating domestic well water data on the type of treatment unit used,
[30Day–05–04JU]
containing elevated levels of arsenic is routine operation parameters, and
Proposed Data Collections Submitted point-of-use water-treatment devices. suggested and actual maintenance
for Public Comment and The purpose of the proposed study is schedules. For the temporal component
Recommendations to evaluate how the efficacy of water- of the study, the study team will test the
treatment devices is affected by user influent and effluent of the treatment
The Centers for Disease Control and
behaviors such as maintenance and units of 30 participating households for
Prevention (CDC) publishes a list of
selection of appropriate technologies total arsenic one time per year. The
information collection requests under
and by variations in water chemistry. percentage of arsenic removed by the
review by the Office of Management and
The requested three year clearance for filter will be compared to the study
Budget (OMB) in compliance with the
this study will focus on a total of 100 criterion selected to indicate that a filter
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
households. Approximately 200 is failing. If the arsenic removal level
Chapter 35). To request a copy of these
households will be recruited and indicates that a treatment unit meets the
requests, call the CDC Reports Clearance
screened to ascertain the 100 eligible criterion for failure, treatment unit
Officer at (404) 371–5974 or send an e-
households. Recruitment is limited to influent and effluent water will be
mail to omb@cdc.gov. Send written
areas of Maine that have high analyzed for inorganic arsenic species
comments to CDC Desk Officer, Human
concentrations of arsenic in and geochemical constituents to
Resources and Housing Branch, New
groundwater. determine whether the chemistry of the
Executive Office Building, Room 10235,
Washington, DC 20503 or by fax to (202) The results will demonstrate how water has changed sufficiently to
395–6974. Written comments should be arsenic removal systems are working in explain the failure.
received within 30 days of this notice. the real world. The data will give A follow-up questionnaire will be
insight into how homeowners are administered biannually and at the time
Proposed Project collecting, interpreting and utilizing of a system failure to determine when
Factors Impacting Effective Removal information on water treatment in order the unit was last maintained and if
of Arsenic by Household Water to select an arsenic-removal system. The operation and maintenance have
Purification Systems—New—National data will show how well the chosen changed. CDC/NCEH will request a 3-
Center for Environmental Health systems are removing arsenic, and how year clearance. There is no cost to
(NCEH), Centers for Disease Control and well they are being maintained. The participants other than their time. The
Prevention (CDC). results will thus identify risk factors total annual burden hours are 56.

ESTIMATE OF ANNUALIZED BURDEN TABLE


Number of Avg. burden
Number of Total burden
Respondents responses/ response
respondents hours
respondent (in hrs.)

Initial recruiting postcard completion ............................................................... 67 1 5/60 6


Follow-up telephone call .................................................................................. 34 1 10/60 6
Initial interview ................................................................................................. 34 1 30/60 17
Biannual follow-up interview ............................................................................ 30 2 25/60 25
System failure follow-up interview ................................................................... 4 1 25/60 2

Total .......................................................................................................... ........................ ........................ ........................ 56

VerDate jul<14>2003 15:59 May 12, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13MYN1.SGM 13MYN1