0694.0132.Renewal.102607

SUPPORTING STATEMENT

U.S. Department of Commerce

Bureau of Industry & Security

Voluntary Self-Disclosure of Antiboycott Violations

OMB Control No. 0694-0132

A. Justification

1. Explain the circumstances that make the collection of information necessary.

This collection is authorized by Section 764.8 of the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) and is needed to strengthen BIS's antiboycott enforcement efforts.

Section 15(b) of the Export Administration Act (EAA) of 1979, as amended, authorizes the President and the Secretary of Commerce to issue regulations to implement the EAA including those provisions authorizing the control of exports of U.S. goods and technology to all foreign destinations, as necessary for the purpose of national security, foreign policy and short supply, and the provision prohibiting U.S. persons from participating in certain foreign boycotts. Export control authority has been assigned directly to the Secretary of Commerce by the EAA and delegated by the President to the Secretary of Commerce. This authority is administered by the Bureau of Industry and Security through the Export Administration Regulations (EAR). The EAA is not permanent legislation, and when it has lapsed due to the failure to enact a timely extension, Presidential executive orders under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) have directed and authorized the continuation in force of the EAR.

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.

Companies wishing to voluntarily self-disclose violations of the antiboycott provisions of the EAR may submit pertinent information, as described under Section 764.8 of the EAR. Section 764 is attached to the ROCIS request.

BIS has codified its antiboycott voluntary self-disclosure policy to increase public awareness of this policy and to provide the public with a good idea of BIS’s likely response to a given disclosure. Voluntary self-disclosures allow BIS to conduct investigations of the disclosed incidents faster than would be the case if BIS had to detect the violations without such disclosures. As a result, BIS is able to devote more of its resources to detecting nondisclosed violations.

BIS evaluates the seriousness of the violation and either (1) informs the person making the disclosure that no action is warranted, (2) issues a warning letter, (3) issues a proposed charging letter and attempts to settle the matter, (4) a charging letter (issued by the U.S. Department of Justice/DOJ) if settlement is not reached and/or (5) refers the matter to DOJ for criminal prosecution. The information obtained through this collection may also provide leads to uncover other violations. In some cases, the information might be shared with other law enforcement agencies investigating suspected violations of the EAA and the EAR or, in appropriate instances, agencies investigating violations of other statutes or with foreign governments.

The Section 515 Information Quality Guidelines apply to this information collection and comply with all applicable information quality guidelines, i.e., OMB, Department of Commerce, and specific operating unit guidelines.

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.

BIS is not aware of any technology which could be adopted to further reduce the collection burden.

4. Describe efforts to identify duplication.

The information disclosed in connection with each violation of the EAA and the EAR is unique and is not duplicated elsewhere. Each collection provides information concerning specified details of individual export or reexport transactions. This information is not available from any source other than from the respondent.

5. If the collection of information involves small businesses or other small entities, describe the methods used to minimize burden.

The information collected may involve small business. However, the seriousness of a particular violation is not related to the size of the business that commits it. There is, therefore, no way to minimize the burden imposed on these businesses without thwarting the purpose of the collection.

6. Describe the consequences to the Federal program or policy activities if the collection is not conducted or is conducted less frequently.

There is no prescribed frequency to the collections. However, we believe that most entities that supply information under this collection will do so only once.

7. Explain any special circumstances that require the collection to be conducted in a manner inconsistent with OMB guidelines.

There are no special circumstances that require the collection of information in a manner that is inconsistent with the guidelines set forth in 5 CFR. Section 1320.

8. Provide the information 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.

The notice requesting public comment was published in the Federal Register on May 30, 2007, p. 29960. No comments were received.

9. Explain any decisions to provide payments or gifts to respondents, other than remuneration of contractors or grantees.

There is no plan to provide any payment or gift to respondents.

10. Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents and the basis for assurance in statute, regulation, or agency policy.

BIS does not provide specific assurances of confidentiality to any respondent. To the extent that information in a disclosure concerns license applications, Section 12(c) of the EAA [50 U.S.C. app. and 2411(c)] would limit BIS's ability to disclose the information and §748.1(c) of the EAR states BIS's policy of complying with Section 12(c).

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 information of a sensitive nature is being requested.

12. Provide an estimate in hours of the burden of the collection of information.

There are 1,280 burden hours associated with this information collection.

This regulation provides a procedure for voluntarily supplying to BIS information that exporters are already required to keep and make available to BIS for inspection when requested. The estimate is provided in two parts. The first estimate is for typical companies. The second estimate is for large multinational corporations.

Each regular sized company will require approximately ten hours to locate, organize and submit the information. The work performed will consist of examining existing business records for evidence of violations, copying those records, preparing the requisite narrative and a cover letter. The work will probably be done by technical or professional personnel. It is estimated that this phase will take about 9 hours. In addition, approximately 1 hour of management/attorney time will be needed to review the records before submitting them to BIS. The estimate is a composite hourly wage of $40.

For large multinational companies, BIS estimates a burden of 600 hours. This estimate is based on comments to the proposed regulation by one large mutilateral corporation, who indicated the original BIS estimate was far too low for large multinational corporations with international operations and many overseas offices.

In calendar year 2006, BIS received 10 antiboycott voluntary self-disclosures. Two were from large companies and 8 were from regular companies. The estimated burden is as follows:

Company Size	Number	Burden	Total
Large	2	600	1,200
Regular	8	10	80
Total	10		1,280

The cost is estimated to be $51,200.

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).

Not applicable.

14. Provide estimates of annualized cost to the Federal government.

The cost to the Federal Government is approximately $3,000. An average of 10 staff hours is needed to process each disclosure. Therefore, 10 cases would take 100 hours to process at a cost of $30 per hour. This figure is significantly lower than the average cost needed to investigate cases that are not the results of voluntary disclosures. The reasons for the difference are that voluntary disclosures eliminate the time that the Government

spends investigating just to learn of the existence of a violation. Also, the information in a voluntary self-disclosure is generally more organized than the information that must be analyzed in other investigations.

15. Explain the reasons for any program changes or adjustments reported in Items 13 or 14 of the OMB 83-I.

Not applicable.

16. For collections whose results will be published, outline the plans for tabulation and publication.

There is no intention to publish the results of this information collection for statistical purposes.

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.

Not applicable.

18. Explain each exception to the certification statement identified in Item 19 of the

OMB 83-I.

Not applicable.

B. COLLECTIONS OF INFORMATION EMPLOYING STATISTICAL METHODS

This collection does not utilize statistical methods.

5