FR 2024-31623

The document from the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) is a formal notice requesting public comments on a planned research study focused on slip resistance in bathtubs. In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, the CPSC seeks to gather insights and approval for this new information collection effort, intended to support the establishment of a voluntary safety standard for bathtubs and showers. This is part of the agency's efforts to reduce slip-and-fall accidents, predominantly affecting individuals aged 65 and above.

Summary

The core purpose of the proposed study is to analyze how slip-resistant bathtubs need to be to minimize accidents effectively. It involves participants stepping into and out of various bathtub models while the researchers measure foot friction and movements. The study will be carried out by Arizona State University, targeting residents in the Phoenix area. This initiative aims to fill the gap left by the withdrawal of a previous standard (ASTM F462) and guide a collaborative effort toward developing updated safety specifications.

Significant Issues

One of the notable concerns is the lack of detail on the total budget for participant compensation and how it compares to similar studies. Understanding the financial scope can provide insights into the study's comprehensiveness and potential for scaling.

The document is also vague on how the resulting findings will be implemented into safety standards and what the timeline for this process might be. Clear communication on these points is crucial to reassure the public and other stakeholders of the study's practical impact.

Additionally, the methodology description could benefit from more clarity. For instance, details on how participants are chosen, and the specific safety measures to be employed, such as the fall arresting harnesses, need further elaboration to enhance transparency and confidence in the study's safety protocols.

The criteria for determining the sample size and the broad age range of respondents warrant more support. This data is crucial in confirming the study’s validity and ensuring its findings are representative for standard-setting purposes.

Impact on the Public and Stakeholders

Broadly, the study has the potential to impact the public by contributing to enhanced safety standards for bathing facilities. Reducing slip-and-fall incidents could decrease safety hazards for a significant portion of the population, especially older adults, thus potentially lowering healthcare costs associated with such injuries.

For individuals and stakeholders directly involved in the bathing facility domain, such as manufacturers and safety organizations, the study presents both opportunities and challenges. On the positive side, the development of a new safety standard could stimulate innovation and the marketing of safer products. However, adapting to a new standard might require resource investment and adjustments to current manufacturing processes.

In terms of public engagement in the comment process, it's crucial that instructions for submitting comments and understanding what not to include (such as confidential information) are clear. The security of alternate submission methods, like email, should also be explicitly described to encourage thorough public participation without inadvertently exposing sensitive information.

The completion of this study and the subsequent establishment of new safety standards have the potential to advance public safety significantly. However, ensuring clear, detailed communications at every stage—from data collection to implementation—is essential for maximizing these benefits and minimizing unintended consequences.

In the Federal Register document concerning the "Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Bathtub Slip Resistance Study," there is a notable financial reference concerning participant compensation. Participants will receive $100 for participation in the study. This financial allocation is an important aspect of the study as it pertains to recruitment and the perceived value of participant involvement.

The document, however, does not clarify the total budget allocated for participant compensation. Given that up to 200 respondents annually, and up to 600 over three years, will be part of the study, it is implied that the compensation budget might reach up to $60,000 over the full period assuming each participant receives this compensation once. Such financial information is crucial for understanding the scale and commitment to the research effort. Detailing the budget can also provide insights into how the study is being prioritized financially relative to other similar studies or consumer safety initiatives.

Moreover, the reference to participant compensation raises questions about whether this financial incentive is competitive or sufficient compared to similar studies. It would be beneficial to understand how this amount was determined and whether it aligns with standard compensation practices in similar research settings.

Additionally, the document raises an issue about the clarity and security of the submission process for public comments, particularly concerning confidential business information. While the document explicitly advises against submitting such information through public portals, it does not address the security of alternative methods, such as email or mail, for sensitive financial or proprietary information. Addressing these security concerns is necessary to ensure stakeholders are adequately informed about how to protect sensitive information when participating or engaging with the regulatory process.

In summary, while the document does provide a clear figure for participant compensation, there is room for greater transparency regarding the overall financial planning and security measures related to the study. Such enhancements could bolster confidence and participation from the public and relevant stakeholders.