SUPPORTING STATEMENT
U.S. Department of Commerce
International Trade Administration
Export Trading Companies Contact
Facilitation Services
OMB CONTROL NO. 0625-0120
A. JUSTIFICATION
1. Explain the circumstances that make the collection of information necessary.
This submission requests an extension of the Office of Management and Budget approval for the export contact facilitation services.
Many U.S. firms do not export because of a fear of the risks involved in exporting, lack of knowledge about the international marketplace, and insufficient resources. These firms need a venue to find one another and share the risks and costs of exporting, and they need the assistance of companies that specialize in providing export trade facilitation services. The Export Trading Company Act of 1982 directs the U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC) to (a) encourage the formation of export associations and export service firms, and (b) provide an exporter referral service that will facilitate contact between producers and export service firms. DOC fulfills its mandate through the Contact Facilitation Service (CFS) operated by the Manufacturing and Services (MAS) unit of the International Trade Administration. The CFS provides a platform for U.S. producers to (a) find one another and form export alliances, to achieve economies of scale, and (b) locate export service firms and attract foreign importers.
The Export Yellow Pages®, a DOC program, produces two directories that draw upon CFS data collection -
(a) “The Export Yellow Pages®,” a directory of U.S. producers of goods and services, and
(b) “U.S. Trade Assistance Directory,” a directory of export trade facilitation firms and other providers of export assistance.
These directories are accessible by international traders worldwide, via the Internet at www.exportyellowpages.com, and as a single print directory published on an annual basis.
The print directory is distributed to Commerce Export Assistance Centers and U.S. embassies and consulates worldwide.
The Contact Facilitation Services Form (ITA-4094P) is used to gather the information necessary to make the directories viable tools for the export firms.
2. Explain how, by whom, how frequently, and for what purpose the information will be used. If the information collected will be disseminated to the public or used to support information that will be disseminated to the public, then explain how the collection complies with all applicable Information Quality Guidelines.
MAS use the information to maintain the directories, as mandated.
Companies that wish to highlight their commercial profile through The Export Yellow Pages® program voluntarily complete the CFS form. U.S. producers of goods and services complete the CFS form so their company profile will be included in The Export Yellow Pages® directory; they seek to attract prospective trading partners and new export customers.
Export service firms register their company profiles to be included in the U.S. Trade Assistance Directory; they seek new clients and new export business. The company profiles of the registrants comprise the CFS database. End-users of the CFS information include U.S. manufacturers, export service firms, wholesalers/distributors, and international service firms.
As noted above, both directories are accessible worldwide via the Internet and in print form. Companies voluntarily register to be included in the CFS database, and they are listed in annual print editions distributed worldwide.
3. Describe whether, and to what extent, the collection of information involves the use of automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological techniques or other forms of information technology.
The current CFS registration form is available and can be submitted via the Internet at www.exportyellowpages.com.
4. Describe efforts to identify duplication.
MAS is unaware of similar information being collected elsewhere.
5. If the collection of information involves small businesses or other small entities, describe the methods used to minimize burden.
The amount of data requested has been reduced to the minimum necessary to benefit the end-user. Further, if the registrant does not have access to the Internet, registration can be accomplished via telephone with confirmation via fax or by mail.
6. Describe the consequences to the Federal program or policy activities if the collection is not conducted or is conducted less frequently.
Without this information, MAS would not be able to approximately characterize and include a firm’s products and services in The Export Yellow Pages®. As such, without the information collected on the CFS form, the CFS database and The Export Yellow Pages® program would be ineffective. End-users of this kind of information need current and consistent information about the listed companies, conducting the collection less frequently would result in out-of-date information.
7. Explain any special circumstances that require the collection to be conducted in a manner inconsistent with OMB guidelines.
The information will be collected consistent with OMB guidelines.
8. Provide a copy of the PRA Federal Register Notice that solicited public comments on the information collection prior to this submission. Summarize the public comments received in response to that notice and describe the actions taken by the agency in response to those comments. Describe the efforts to consult with persons outside the agency to obtain their views on the availability of data, frequency of collection, the clarity of instructions and recordkeeping, disclosure, or reporting format (if any), and on the data elements to be recorded, disclosed, or reported.
A Federal Register Notice soliciting public comment was published on May 30, 2008
(Volume 73, pg. 31057). No public comments were received.
MAS staff regularly consults with firms to determine areas where improvements to the Contact Facilitation Service process can be made. The firms have expressed no problems with the format of the form, the clarity of instructions and the amount of time required to provide the information. There are no unresolved substantive or material issues stemming from these consultation efforts. Firms typically characterize the CFS as “user friendly,” “quick,” and “easy-to-use.”
9. Explain any decisions to provide payments or gifts to respondents, other than remuneration of contractors or grantees.
None.
10. Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents and the basis for assurance in statute, regulation, or agency policy.
None.
11. Provide additional justification for any questions of a sensitive nature, such as sexual behavior and attitudes, religious beliefs, and other matters that are commonly considered private.
No questions of a sensitive nature are asked.
12. Provide an estimate in hours of the burden of the collection of information.
The public reporting for this collection of information is estimated to be 15 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. On the basis of 18,000 responses per year, at 15 minutes per response, the total estimated burden hours = 4,500 hours. (The 15 minutes response time estimate is based on observing several respondents combined with the judgment of people who deal regularly with these forms.)
The labor cost associated with supplying this information is estimated at $94,500.
13. Provide an estimate of the total annual cost burden to the respondents or record-keepers resulting from the collection (excluding the value of the burden hours in #12 above).
None.
14. Provide estimates of annualized cost to the Federal government.
Estimated annual cost to the government is minimal. Approximately 100% of the respondents complete the CFS form online, requiring no interaction by government staff. Commerce’s cost for storing, updating and maintaining the CFS database is nil, as a result of a public-private partnership.
15. Explain the reasons for any program changes or adjustments.
The adjustment increase in responses and burden hours is due to an in the number of respondents since the previous submission. The respondents/responses increased by 3,500 (from 14,500 to 18,000) and the burden hours by 875 (from 3,625 to 4,500).
16. For collections whose results will be published, outline the plans for tabulation and publication.
Not Applicable.
17. If seeking approval to not display the expiration date for OMB approval of the information collection, explain the reasons why display would be inappropriate.
The OMB number and expiration date will be displayed on the form.
18. Explain each exception to the certification statement identified in Item 19 of the
OMB 83-I.
None.
B. COLLECTIONS OF INFORMATION EMPLOYING STATISTICAL METHODS
This collection of information does not employ statistical methodologies.
| File Type | application/msword |
| File Title | SUPPORTING STATEMENT |
| Author | gbanks |
| File Modified | 2008-11-25 |
| File Created | 2008-11-25 |