ICR supporting statement 062817

2017 SUPPORTING STATEMENT
Voluntary Labeling Program for Biobased Products
Under Title IX, Section 9002
OMB 0503-0020
A. Justification
1. Explain the circumstances that make the collection of information necessary. Identify
any legal or administrative requirements that necessitate the collection. Attach a copy of
the appropriate section of each statute and regulation mandating or authorizing the
collection of information.
Section 9002(h) of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act (FSRIA) of 2002, as amended by
the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act (FCEA) of 2008 and the Agricultural Act of 2014,
requires the Secretary of Agriculture to implement a voluntary labeling program that would
enable qualifying biobased products to be certified with a “USDA Certified Biobased Product”
label. The voluntary labeling program is required to be consistent, where possible, with the
guidelines implementing the preferred procurement of biobased products by Federal agencies
(referred to hereafter as the Federal preferred procurement program), which is also authorized
under section 9002 of FSRIA. A brief overview of the statutory requirements for the Federal
preferred procurement program (part of the BioPreferred Program) is presented below. The
BioPreferred Program is currently implemented by USDA’s Office of Procurement and Property
Management (OPPM).
Under the Federal preferred procurement program, Federal agencies are required to purchase,
with certain exceptions, biobased products that are identified, by rulemaking, for preferred
procurement. For biobased products, which are grouped in product categories, to qualify for the
Federal preferred procurement program, the statute requires that the Secretary consider
information on the availability of products, the economic and technological feasibility of using
these goods, and the life-cycle costs of using such items. In addition, the Secretary is required to
provide to Federal agencies information on the availability, price, performance, and
environmental and public health benefits of the biobased products and is required to recommend
the level of biobased material to be contained in the procured product, where appropriate. This
information must also be provided in rulemaking to identify product categories and the products
within them for Federal preferred procurement.
2. Indicate how, by whom, how frequently, and for what purpose the information is to be
used. Except for a new collection, indicate the actual use the agency has made of the
information received from the current collection.
Under the voluntary labeling program, manufacturers and vendors must complete an application
for each stand-alone biobased product or biobased product family for which they wish to use the
label. A stand-alone product is one that is marketed or sold under a single product name, while a
product family is a group of products that share the same formulation and biobased content
(within 3%) yet are marketed differently depending on factors such as brand names or uses. The

application process is electronic and is accessible through the voluntary labeling program
website. When the voluntary labeling program was being developed, a paper application form
(numbered 2904-1) was created. However, that form was eliminated once the electronic
application process was implemented. In addition, manufacturers and vendors whose
applications have been conditionally approved must provide certain information for OPPM to
post on the voluntary labeling program Web site. For each product approved by the Agency for
use of the label, the manufacturer or vendor must keep that information for each certified product
up-to-date. Finally, manufacturers and vendors must interact with OPPM as a result of the
planned audit activities for the program.
•

Applications

A one-time application for certification is required to be submitted at the beginning of the
certification process. OPPM reviews all applications for completeness and provides an
opportunity for applicants to correct and/or modify the application if deficiencies are found. The
information requested for inclusion in the application are: (1) contact information (of the
manufacturer or vendor and preparer of application) and (2) product identification information,
including brand name(s), the applicable designated item category or categories or equivalent, and
the biobased content of the product. As stated previously, one application is required for each
stand-alone product or product family for which certification is sought. In addition, the applicant
is required to certify to certain information. The information in these areas is described in more
detail below along with the CFR citation that specifies the information to be submitted. Note
that the CFR citations have changed since the original OMB approval of the information
collection. In August 2011, following the transfer of the BioPreferred Program from the Office
of the Chief Economist to OPPM, the voluntary labeling program’s regulations were moved to
Section 3202, a section that is assigned to OPPM.
o Contact Information (§ 3202.5(a)(1)). With each application, the applicant must provide
its company name and mailing address. In addition, the application requires including
the name of the application’s preparer, as well as the preparer’s mailing address (if
different from that of the manufacturer or vendor), email address, and telephone number.
This information is necessary to communicate with the applicant regarding any issues
with the application, notifying the applicant as to whether the application is deficient, and
notifying the applicant whether the application has been approved for the third-party
testing and final certification stage of the process.
o Brand name(s) (§ 3202.5(a)(1)). As products may be marketed under different brand
names, the application requests that all brand names for the product be identified. Thus,
the application requires the applicant to identify the stand-alone product or product
family for which certification is sought by providing the brand name(s) for the standalone product or products within a product family.
o Biobased content and testing information (§ 3202.5(a)(1)). The application requires the
applicant to document the product’s biobased content as determined by a third-party
testing entity that is ISO 9001 conformant. The coordination of product testing is
2

currently performed by Safety Equipment Institute (SEI), a subsidiary of ASTM
International, under a contract with USDA.
This information is necessary to ensure that the biobased content meets the applicable
minimum biobased content for the product and that a qualified, independent, third-party
testing entity coordinated the testing and final certification results.
o Product category (§ 3202.5(a)(1)). The application requires the applicant to identify
whether the product (1) meets or exceeds the requirements for a product category that has
been identified as eligible for the Federal preferred procurement program, (2) is a
finished product that does not meet or exceed the requirements for a product category
identified for Federal preferred procurement, or (3) is an intermediate ingredient or
feedstock that does not meet or exceed the requirements for a product category identified
for Federal preferred procurement. If the product meets or exceeds the requirements for a
product category identified for Federal preferred procurement, the application requires
the applicant to specify all relevant product category(ies).
To qualify for the third-party testing and final certification stage of the application
process, it is necessary that a product’s estimated biobased content meets or exceeds the
applicable minimum biobased content for that type of product. The applicable minimum
biobased content is dependent upon which of the three aforementioned groups of
products that the product for which certification is being sought best fits. Therefore, this
information is necessary to determine the applicable minimum biobased content that
should be used to evaluate the product for final certification.
o Intended uses of the product (§ 3202.5(a)(1)). The application requires the applicant to
identify the intended uses of the product.
This information is necessary because it is sometimes challenging to determine what a
product’s intended use is from the product name alone. OPPM needs this information to
confirm if the product meet or exceeds the requirements of a product category(ies) that
are eligible for Federal preferred procurement and whether the applicant has accurately
identified the appropriate product category(ies) for its product. Knowledge of which
product categories that are eligible for Federal preferred procurement, if any, that the
product best fits is required to identify the applicable minimum biobased content for the
product.
o Certifying statements (§ 3202.5(a)(2)). The applicant must certify that the product for
which use of the label is sought is a biobased product, as defined in 7 CFR § 3202.2 and
that it meets the country of origin requirements specified in 7 CFR § 3201.4(b)(3).
These statements are necessary to ensure that the product is an eligible product for the
voluntary labeling program.
o Commitments (§ 3202.5(a)(3)). The applicant must also sign a statement in the
application that commits the applicant as follows:
3

The commits to submitting to OPPM certain specified information (as described later
under Web site Information), which OPPM will post to the voluntary labeling program
Web site, and to providing OPPM with up-to-date information for posting on this Web
site.
These actions are necessary to help ensure that consumers purchasing a product with the
label have access to sufficient information to make reasoned purchasing decisions.
Further, the information that is posted on the voluntary labeling program Web site and
made available to eligible requestors is important to help isolate certified biobased
products from non-certified biobased products, a key purpose of the voluntary labeling
program.
o Reformulated Products (§ 3202.5(d)(3)). Circumstances may arise in which a
manufacturer or vendor may make changes to a certified product during the term of an
existing certification. If any of these changes are significant enough, the existing
certification will no longer be valid for the product under the revised conditions and the
manufacturer or vendor, as applicable, and its designated representatives would be
required to discontinue affixing the label to the product and would be prohibited from
initiating any further advertising of the product using the label. The circumstances under
which this would occur are if:
•
•

the product formulation is revised such that the biobased content of the product is
lower than the percentage that is reported in the most recent application; or
the product formulation is revised such that the biobased content of the product is
greater than the percentage that is reported in the most recent application and the
manufacturer wishes to report the higher percentage on the label.

When such circumstances arise, OPPM considers a product under such revised conditions
to be a reformulated product and the manufacturer or vendor, as applicable, must submit
an amended application for certification using the procedures specified in § 3202.5.
Amended applications are requested under the above identified circumstances because it
is important to the integrity of the voluntary labeling program that the label be used only
on those products that meet or exceed their applicable minimum biobased content
requirements.
The frequency under which a manufacturer or vendor would seek re-certification under
the circumstances described above depends upon the frequency with which such changes
occur.
•

Web site Information (§ 3202.5(c)(1) – (c)(4))

Manufacturers and vendors are responsible for providing certain information for OPPM to post
publically on the voluntary labeling program Web site regarding products that have been
certified to use the label prior to the use of the label on the certified products (§ 3202.5(c)(1)(c)(4)). The information to be posted publically on the Web site include the company’s name,
4

the company’s address, the product’s name, the product’s description including details on how to
use it and any unique features, the product’s certified biobased content, the product categories in
which the product belongs, and a link to the applicant’s Web site (if available). Information such
as the applicant’s name, email address, and phone number are stored in the program’s database
and are inaccessible to the public.
This information is necessary to allow those who would purchase the product under the Federal
preferred procurement program to: (1) identify what biobased products are available, (2)
compare the biobased contents of similar products to assist in selecting those with the highest
biobased content, and (3) provide an additional resource via the company’s Web site if the
purchasing agent has questions regarding a particular product.
Finally, it is important that manufacturers and vendors keep the information provided to OPPM
for public posting on the voluntary labeling program Web site up-to-date so that those who
would purchase such products have the correct information when making purchasing decisions.
The frequency of updating the voluntary labeling program Web site depends on how frequently a
manufacturer or vendor makes changes to its product(s). Additionally, the applicant should
ensure that his/her contact information is current so that OPPM may easily communicate with
him/her should any questions arise regarding the certified product(s).
•

Records (§ 3202.9)

The labor burden associated with this program includes estimates of the time necessary for
manufacturers and vendors to keep records of the documentation that OPPM believes is needed
to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of the rule. The following paragraphs describe
the recordkeeping activities that have been included in the estimates of the total labor burden.
Manufacturers and vendors are required to maintain records associated with (1) the results of all
tests, and any associated calculations, performed to determine the biobased content of the
product, (2) the date of the certification by OPPM, the dates of changes in formulation of
certified biobased products, and the dates when the biobased content of certified biobased
products were tested, and (3) documentation of analyses performed by manufacturers to support
claims of environmental or human health benefits, life cycle cost, sustainability benefits, and
product performance made by the manufacturer.
For each certified product, records must be maintained for at least 3 years beyond their creation
or as long as necessary to support the most recently approved application for the certified
product, whichever is greater.
The requirement to keep records of biobased content testing is needed to allow OPPM to audit
manufacturers and vendors to ensure that a certified product is in compliance with its applicable
minimum biobased content and that the biobased content on the label is accurate.
The requirement to keep supporting documentation that the product for which certification is
sought meets the definition of biobased product is needed to ensure that only products meeting
the specified definition of a biobased product are certified.
5

Finally, the requirement to keep the various date records is needed to ensure that the label is
being affixed to a product(s) during an active certification period. Changes in formulation and
biobased contents can trigger the requirement to seek a new certification and, thus, affect the
applicable certification period of a product.
•

Oversight and Monitoring (§ 3202.10)

OPPM conducts oversight and monitoring of manufacturers, vendors, designated representatives,
and other entities involved with the voluntary labeling program to ensure compliance. This
oversight includes, but is not limited to, conducting facility visits of manufacturers and vendors
who have certified products, and of their designated representatives. Manufacturers, vendors,
and their designated representatives are required to cooperate fully with all OPPM audit efforts
for the monitoring of compliance with the voluntary labeling program regulations. In addition,
OPPM conducts biobased content testing of certified products to ensure compliance. Finally,
manufacturers, vendors, and their designated representatives must allow Federal representatives
access to the records required for inspection and copying during normal Federal business hours.
This is necessary to ensure that manufacturers and vendors are complying with the requirements
of the program, which in turn helps ensure the integrity of the voluntary labeling program.
3. Describe whether, and to what extent, the collection of information involves the use of
automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other
forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses, and
the basis for the decision for adopting this means of collection. Also, describe any
consideration of using information technology to reduce burden.
The application process is designed to be completed electronically through the voluntary labeling
program Web site. Doing so streamlines the process and avoids the preparation and transmittal
of paper forms.
To obtain certification, manufacturers and vendors of certified biobased products are required to
provide certain product and manufacturer or vendor information for OPPM to post publically to
the voluntary labeling program Web site, as described earlier. This provides Federal agencies an
electronic means to identify available biobased products for the Federal preferred procurement
program. Every effort is being made to further streamline the processes with which OPPM
interacts with manufacturers and vendors to reduce the cost and time burden on the participants
in the voluntary labeling program.
4. Describe efforts to identify duplication. Show specifically why any similar information
already available cannot be used or modified for use for the purpose described in item 2
above.
To receive certification to use the label, manufacturers and vendors must submit information on
the biobased content of the product. Some of the products for which certification is being sought
will have already undergone this test as a part of the process of identifying product categories
6

and their associated products as eligible for Federal preferred procurement. Further, some of the
manufacturers and vendors may have already posted some of the information required under the
voluntary labeling program to the voluntary labeling program Web site as a part of the Federal
preferred procurement program of the BioPreferred Program. The requirements of the voluntary
labeling program allow manufacturers and vendors to use this information that has already been
developed. Therefore, we do not anticipate any duplication of information under the voluntary
labeling program.
5. If the collection of information impacts small businesses or other small entities, describe
any methods used to minimize burden.
The voluntary labeling program is a voluntary program in which all manufacturers and vendors,
including small businesses that have biobased products, may participate. In a 2011 study of
about 60 percent of the manufacturers and vendors participating in the BioPreferred Program, 97
percent reported to have less than 500 employees and only 3 percent reported to have greater
than 500 employees. Thus, based on this sample and using a maximum of 500 employees as the
criterion for defining a small business, OPPM estimates that about 97 percent of the companies
that could choose to participate in the voluntary labeling program are classified as small
businesses.
One potential burden related to participation in the voluntary labeling program is that which is
associated with the graphic redesign of a product’s packaging (§ 3202.7). Manufacturers and
vendors that have received certification to use the label will need to redesign the graphics on
their product’s packaging for each certified product to incorporate the “USDA Certified
Biobased Product” label. If manufacturers and vendors redesign the graphics on their product’s
packaging outside of the planned schedule, then the cost to incorporate the “USDA Certified
Biobased Product” label could be attributable to the voluntary labeling program. However, there
are few, if any, incremental costs associated with incorporating the label if done as a part of the
manufacturer’s or vendor’s planned schedule for graphic redesign of its packaging or for the
initial design of a newly certified product. Because the voluntary labeling program is voluntary,
manufacturers and vendors have the opportunity to schedule incorporation of the label into their
next scheduled product packaging redesign and avoid this cost.
Another potentially large burden is associated with biobased content testing. While biobased
content testing is necessary to participate in the voluntary labeling program, its cost is relatively
low (about $400) when compared to the overall cost of new product development. In addition,
OPPM allows manufacturers to perform only one test in situations where a single product
formulation is marketed under multiple brand names.
6. Describe the consequence to Federal program or policy activities if the collection is not
conducted or is conducted less frequently, as well as any technical or legal obstacles to
reducing burden.
OPPM only collects the minimum information and test results for individual products necessary
to determine the eligibility of the products for certification to display the USDA Certified
Biobased Product label. An initial application is necessary to make this determination. Failure
7

to collect this information would result in many ineligible products using the label, thereby
rendering the program useless.
Failure to require manufacturers and vendors to provide up-to-date information on each certified
product for OPPM to publically post on the voluntary labeling program Web site could result in
purchasers making poor purchase decisions and in inefficiencies in making purchasing decisions
(e.g., trying to purchase a product that has been renamed).
7. Explain any special circumstances that would cause an information collection to be
conducted in a manner:
•

requiring respondents to report information to the agency more often than
quarterly;

Under the voluntary labeling program, two situations occur under which a manufacturer or
vendor is required to supply information to OPPM.
One is where a change is made to a product’s formulation that results in a change in the biobased
content of the product to such an extent that submittal of a new application is required.
However, it is highly unlikely that such changes would occur quarterly.
The second is the requirement to provide OPPM with up-to-date product information. Again,
this action is only required when information changes and, though likely to occur more
frequently than formulation changes, is highly unlikely to occur more often than quarterly.
OPPM does not anticipate either of the above circumstances to result in reporting of information
on any one product more often than quarterly, and anticipates a much longer time frame for each
product.
•

requiring respondents to prepare a written response to a collection of information in
fewer than 30 days after receipt of it;

Under the voluntary labeling program, no routine written responses are required in fewer than 30
days after receipt of the request. However, there are special situations related to violations of the
program rules in which a manufacturer or vendor is expected to supply a response within 30
days. These are: (1) submittal of a new application when OPPM testing determines that the
biobased content of a product is less than reported in the most recently approved application but
is still equal to or greater than its applicable minimum biobased content(s) (§ 3202.8(b)(1)(ii)),
(2) suspension of a certification for biobased content violations (§ 3202.8(c)(1)(i)), and (3)
appeals (§ 3202.6(a)(1)).
Manufacturers or vendors who receive a notice of violation for other types of violations must
correct the violation(s) within 90 days from receipt of the notice of violation.
•

requiring respondents to submit more than an original and two copies of any
document;
8

OPPM does not require more than an original of any document submitted by manufacturers and
vendors seeking certification.
•

requiring respondents to retain records, other than health, medical, government
contract, grant-in-aid, or tax records for more than three years;

Under the voluntary labeling program, manufacturers and vendors are required to keep certain
records to support the information presented in their applications (§ 3202.9(a)(1) through (3)).
The program requires that these records are kept for 3years after their creation or as long as
necessary to support the most recently approved application for the certified product, whichever
is greater (§ 3202.9(b)).
Information provided by manufacturers and vendors for posting on the voluntary labeling
program Web site is the kind of information that a company would normally have to provide
customers in the normal course of business, for as long as would be typically required in the
normal course of business and as such does not represent a new and unreasonable burden on
manufacturers and vendors.
•

in connection with a statistical survey, that is not designed to produce valid and
reliable results that can be generalized to the universe of study;

OPPM does not envision initiating any statistical surveys.
•

requiring the use of a statistical data classification that has not been reviewed and
approved by OMB;

OPPM does not expect to conduct statistical surveys or require use of statistical data
classifications.
•

that includes a pledge of confidentiality that is not supported by authority
established in statute or regulation, that is not supported by disclosure and data
security policies that are consistent with the pledge, or which unnecessarily impedes
sharing of data with other agencies for compatible confidential use; or

Product and manufacturer and vendor information posted on the voluntary labeling program Web
site is publicly available to view, but only OPPM is able to change the posted information.
•

requiring respondents to submit proprietary trade secret, or other confidential
information unless the agency can demonstrate that it has instituted procedures to
protect the information's confidentiality to the extent permitted by law.

OPPM does not believe that any of the information required for the voluntary labeling program
is considered confidential by respondents.
9

8. If applicable, provide a copy and identify the date and page number of publication in
the Federal Register of the agency's notice, soliciting comments on the information
collection prior to submission to OMB. Summarize public comments received in response
to that notice and describe actions taken by the agency in response to these comments.
OPPM published a Notice requesting comment on the extension of the previously approved
information collection for the Voluntary Labeling Program (see 82 FR 16783, Thursday, April 6,
2017). The public comment period for the Notice lasted 60 days and one comment was received.
The one public comment was from the Biobased Products Coalition (BPC) and can be
summarized by the following quote from the submittal:
“The BPC supports this proposed collection of information as necessary to USDA’s implementation

of the statutorily-mandated “USDA Certified Biobased Product” voluntary labeling program. The
BPC believes that USDA’s burden estimate is reasonable.”

The remainder of the comment presented BPC’s support for the Voluntary Labeling Program as
an important means of promoting awareness of biobased products in the marketplace.
•

Describe 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 form, and on the data elements to be
recorded, disclosed, or reported.

During the development of the biobased products voluntary labeling program, OPPM had
discussions with other agencies that have implemented labeling programs, such as the
Environmental Protection Agency’s and the Department of Energy’s “ENERGY STAR”
program. OPPM also had extensive discussions with the White House Council on
Environmental Quality (CEQ), CEQ’s Office of the Federal Environmental Executive (OFEE),
the Office of Management and Budget, USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service, the Defense
Logistics Agency, National Institute of Standards and technology (NIST), and the General
Services Administration to seek their views on the biobased program and the requirements for
the voluntary labeling rule. OPPM has also consulted with representatives of the Department of
Agriculture’s National Organic Program.
In 2013, OPPM also contacted several manufacturers and vendors of biobased products that have
been certified to use the USDA Certified Biobased Product label to discuss their experiences
with the application process. Representatives of companies including NatureWorks, Lenzing,
General Mills, Earth Friendly Chemicals, Ecolab, Green Earth Technologies, and Seventh
Generation provided positive feedback concerning their use of the online application process.
OPPM support staff routinely provides assistance via phone and email to manufacturers seeking
to have their biobased products certified to display the label. During discussions with these
manufacturers, OPPM requests feedback on the efficiency of the application process and how it
could be improved. Many manufacturers have provided positive feedback during the past three
years, including; Georgia Pacific, Evergreen Packaging, Proctor and Gamble, Natracare, Baril,
Treleoni, Cintas/Santec, BioFiber Solutions International, and Seventh Generation. In addition,
10

as discussed above, the Biobased Products Coalition provided a public comment stating their
support for the BioPreferred Program and their belief that the estimated burden is reasonable.
9. Explain any decision to provide any payment or gift to respondents, other than
remuneration of contractors or grantees.
There is no intent to provide any payment or gift to respondents.
10. Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents and the basis for the
assurance in statute, regulation, or agency policy.
OPPM does not believe that any of the information required for the voluntary labeling program
is considered confidential by respondents.
11. Provide additional justification for any questions of a sensitive nature, such as sexual
behavior or attitudes, religious beliefs, and other matters that are commonly considered
private. This justification should include the reasons why the agency considers the
questions necessary, the specific uses to be made of the information, the explanation to be
given to persons from whom the information is requested, and any steps to be taken to
obtain their consent.
No such questions are asked of the manufacturers and vendors seeking to participate in the
voluntary labeling program.
12. Provide estimates of the hour burden of the collection of information. The statement
should:
•

Indicate the number of respondents, frequency of response, annual hour burden,
and an explanation of how the burden was estimated. If this request for approval
covers more than one form, provide separate hour burden estimates for each form
and aggregate the hour burdens in Item 13 of OMB Form 83-I.

In the past three calendar years that the voluntary labeling program has been in operation, the
average number of respondents (applicants) was about 12.5 per month and the average number
of responses (applications) was about 33.5 per month. Thus, each respondent submitted an
average of about 3 responses. As will be shown in the following paragraphs, the total estimated
burden for each individual application is three hours of the applicant’s time at an estimated cost
of $141.45. As discussed elsewhere, because the voluntary labeling program is voluntary, the
burden to the applicant to participate in the program is also voluntary. It should also be noted
that, as will be discussed in Item 15 below, OPPM has made significant strides in reducing the
burden place on applicants since the program began. These burden reductions have resulted
from simplifying and streamlining the application process so that one application often covers
multiple similar products.
The total estimated annual average hour burden for the collection of information (completing
applications, testing, providing information for the biobased Web site, and recordkeeping) under
11

this program over the next three years is estimated to be 1,350 hours (150 respondents per year
times 3 applications per respondent = 450 applications per year times 3 hours per application =
1,350 hours).
Table 1 presents a summary of the estimate of the hour burden.

TABLE 1. ESTIMATE OF HOUR BURDEN
Year

1

2

3

Total for
3-yr
period
Average
Annual
Values

•

Description of Information
Collection Activity

Number of
Respondents

Total
Annual
Responses

Hours
per
Response

Total
Hours

150

Number of
Responses
per
Respondent
3

Complete application for
certification, have product
tested for biobased content,
and provide information for
posting to Web site
Complete application for
certification, have product
tested for biobased content,
and provide information for
posting to Web site
Complete application for
certification, have product
tested for biobased content,
and provide information for
posting to Web site

450

3

1,350

150

3

450

3

1,350

150

3

450

3

1,350

450

1,350

3

4,050

150

450

3

1,350

Provide estimates of annualized cost to respondents for the hour burdens for
collections of information, identifying and using appropriate wage rate categories.

The average annualized total cost to all respondents for the collection of information over the
next three years is estimated to be $85,735. This is based on an average annual total hour burden
over the next three years of the program of 1,350 hours priced at $47.15 per hour (as discussed
below) plus the $22,082 in annualized cost for the biobased content testing (see Item 13 below).
The hourly rate of $47.15 is based on U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data a that show that $857
a

“Household Data Annual Averages,” U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, accessed May 5, 2017,
https://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat43.pdf.
12

was the median weekly employee earnings in 2016 for the manufacturing industry, which
translates to a median hourly rate of $21.43 if a 40 hour work week is assumed. This $21.43
median hourly rate was increased by an overhead markup rate of 120 percent to yield a rate of
$47.15 per hour, which is considered reasonable under the expectation that at least half the
burden hours would likely be provided by employees earning less than this hourly rate and up to
half the employees would be earning more. As such, each application is estimated to have a cost
burden of $141.45 ($47.15 per hour times 3 hours per application).
Table 2 presents a summary of the estimated cost of the labor hour burden.

TABLE 2. ANNUALIZED COST OF LABOR HOUR BURDEN
Year

1

2

3

Total for
3-yr
period
Average
Annual
Values

Description of Information
Collection Activity
Complete application for
certification, have product
tested for biobased content,
and provide information for
posting to Web site
Complete application for
certification, have product
tested for biobased content,
and provide information for
posting to Web site
Complete application for
certification, have product
tested for biobased content,
and provide information for
posting to Web site

Total
Annual
Responses
450

Hours
per
Response
3

Total
Hours
1,350

Labor
Rate,
$/Hr.
47.15

Total Annual
Labor Hours
Cost
$63,653

450

3

1,350

47.15

$63,653

450

3

1,350

47.15

$63,653

1,350

3

4,050

47.15

$190,959

450

3

1,350

47.15

$63,653

13.
Provide estimates of the total annual cost burden to respondents or record keepers
resulting from the collection of information (do not include the cost of any hour burden
shown in items 12 and 14). The cost estimates should be split into two components: (a) a
total capital and start-up cost component annualized over its expected useful life; and (b) a
total operation and maintenance and purchase of services component.
Manufacturers and vendors are required to incur a one-time initial cost associated with testing
their products for biobased content. Each product is estimated to incur a cost of $400 for
biobased content testing. Assuming a manufacturer or vendor maintains certification of a
13

product for at least 10 years, this one-time cost is annualized using a factor of 0.12268 (3.9%
interest rate over 10 years). For the estimated 450 products for which applications are submitted
each year, the average three-year annualized cost for these tests is estimated to be $22,082.
Table 3 presents a summary of the estimated capital and startup costs.

TABLE 3. SUMMARY OF CAPITAL/STARTUP COSTS
Biobased Content Testing
Number of Products Tested
Cost per Test
Total Biobased Content Testing Cost
Annualized Cost (over 10 yrs @ 3.9%
interest)

Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

450
450
450
$400
$400
$400
$180,000 $180,000 $180,000
$22,082 $22,082 $22,082

3-Year
Average
450
$400
$180,000
$22,082

Table 4 presents an overall summary of the burden estimate inputs and the estimated average
annualized cost to respondents, using the estimates from Tables 1 through 3.

TABLE 4. SUMMARY OF BURDEN ESTIMATE INPUTS
Year 1
Number of respondents (manufacturers and
vendors applying to use label)
Number of responses (applications) per respondents
Number of responses (applications)
Hours for all manufacturers and vendors to apply
for certification (1.5 hours per response)
Hours required to provide information to OPPM for
posting (1.0 hours per response)
Hours required for recordkeeping (0.5 hours per
response)
Total annual hour burden
3-year average hour burden
Labor cost per hour
Average annual labor cost
Average annualized cost for biobased content
testing (see Item 13)
Average annualized cost to respondents

Year 2

Year 3

150
3
450

150
3
450

150
3
450

675

675

675

450

450

450

225
1,350

225
1,350
4,050
$47.15
$63,653

225
1,350

$22,082
$85,735

14.
Provide estimates of annualized cost to the Federal government. Also, provide a
description of the method used to estimate cost and any other expense that would not have
been incurred without this collection of information.
14

Under the guidelines for the BioPreferred Program, OPPM estimates the annualized cost to the
Federal government of operating that Program and (including an associated model procurement
program) will range from $3.0 to $3.5 million annually. This estimate is based on the costs of
program operation, maintenance of the electronic information system, testing of biobased
products, and operation of a model procurement program, all of which are mandated in section
9002 of FSRIA. The estimates of costs to the Federal government for the voluntary labeling
program, including its associated audit program, are included in the estimated $3.0 to $3.5
million annual cost.
15.
Explain the reasons for any program changes or adjustments reported in Items 13
or 14 of the OMB Form 83-1.
OPPM estimates that the annual labor hour burden over the next three years will be significantly
less than that which was originally estimated in the ICR approval request for the past three years.
In the 2014 ICR approval request, the estimated number of respondents per year was 300. This
represents a reduction of 150 respondents per year over the next three years. The estimated
number of responses per year in the 2014 request was 1,200. In this current request, the
estimated number of responses per year is 450. This is a reduction of 750 responses per year. In
the 2014 request, the estimated annual labor hour burden was 3,600 hours. In this current
request, the estimated annual labor hour burden is 1,350. This is a decrease of 2,250 burden
hours per year compared to the previous submission. The rationale for the overall decrease in
estimated burden is presented in the following paragraphs.
In 2010, when the original estimates were made, the voluntary labeling program was still under
development and OPPM had no way to accurately predict to what extent the biobased industry
would choose to pursue certifying products to display the label. Based on the past six years of
experience in implementing the voluntary labeling program, OPPM now believes that the
estimated number of applications and the overall burden estimates presented above in this
document are much more accurate that the original estimates. Several additional factors also
have contributed to this significant decrease in the estimated burden.
At the time the original approval was requested, it was anticipated that the program would rely to
a significant degree on the submission of paper application forms. By the time the voluntary
labeling program was actually rolled-out, an electronic system had been developed that allowed
the entire application process to be completed through the BioPreferred Program’s Web site.
Implementing the electronic application process resulted in a significant reduction in the hour
burden on respondents from the original estimate. Additionally, in 2014 the Program’s Web site
underwent a redesign and update to improve user interface. As a result, the electronic
application process was streamlined to allow applicants to submit one application for a group of
products that share the same formulation and biobased content (within 3%) yet are marketed
differently depending on factors such as brand names or uses; this group of products is referred
to as a product family. Allowing applicants to do so reduced the number of applications that the
applicant previously would submit.
Therefore, OPPM has also lowered the estimated number of applications each manufacturer is
expected to submit from four to three. OPPM has also reduced the cost of the biobased content
15

testing from $500 per sample to $400 per sample, based on information provided by the certified
labs that perform the testing. In addition, OPPM has eliminated from the estimated program
costs the cost attributed to graphic redesign of product packaging to include the USDA Certified
Biobased Product label. Because of the reported frequency that most manufacturers make
changes to their product packaging and because many of the biobased products that have
received certification are new products, OPPM believes that the cost of packaging redesign
should be considered a normal part of doing business and not a cost attributed to the voluntary
labeling program.
16.
For collections of information whose results are planned to be published, outline
plans for tabulation and publication.
Collections of information are published in that they are posted to the voluntary labeling program
Web site.
17.
If seeking approval to not display the expiration date for OMB approval of the
information collection, explain the reasons that display would be inappropriate.
OPPM is not seeking approval to not display the expiration date for OMB approval of the
information collection.
18.
Explain each exception to the certification statement identified in Item 19
"Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act."
There are no exceptions to the certification statement identified in Item 19 “Certification for
Paperwork Reduction Act.”
19.

How is this information collection related to the Customer Service Center?

This information collection is not related to the Customer Service Center, but is a statutory
requirement of section 9002 of FSRIA, as amended by subsequent Farm Bill legislation, that
established the Federal biobased Products Preferred Procurement Program.
B.

Collections of information employing statistical methods

The collection of information under this program does not and is not expected to employ
statistical methods.

16