FR 2021-00873

The document from the Federal Register, titled "Agency Information Collection Activities; Certification of Blasters in Federal Program States and on Indian Lands," originates from the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE) under the Interior Department. The notice details an initiative to renew a process for collecting information related to the certification of blasters. This renewal is part of compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, aiming to ensure that information collection by the federal government is efficient and necessary.

Summary of the Document

The primary objective of the document is to solicit public commentary on an information collection proposal tied to qualifying individuals for blaster certification. The certification is essential in certain federal program states and on Indian lands. The document provides specific instructions for interested parties to submit their feedback by February 16, 2021. The comments can be related to several aspects like the necessity of the information being gathered, its accuracy, the associated burdens, and how these burdens could be minimized using modern technological measures for data submission.

Significant Issues or Concerns

Several potential issues and concerns emerge from the document:

• Lack of Specific Criteria: The document does not clearly outline the eligibility criteria for the applicants seeking blaster certification. This omission could lead to ambiguities in interpreting who qualifies for certification, potentially resulting in inconsistencies in application evaluations.

• Time Estimation Ambiguity: It mentions an estimated completion time of 1 hour per response but does not specify the tasks included within that hour. As a result, applicants may inadvertently underestimate or overestimate the required time, causing either undue effort or insufficient preparation.

• Privacy Concerns: Although the document states that comments are public records, it also notes that personal information may not always be safeguarded from public review. This lack of absolute privacy assurance could deter individuals from providing feedback, fearing exposure of their personal data.

• Redundant Information: The address for submitting comments appears in two formats within the document. This duplication can create confusion among respondents about the correct submission method.

Impact on the Public

Broadly, the document affects individuals interested in obtaining blaster certifications. If successfully implemented, it may lead to a streamlined process that helps ensure qualified personnel are operating in areas where blasting activities are regulated. However, ambiguity regarding the criteria and procedures may induce some hesitation or confusion, potentially impacting the quality and quantity of applicants.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

Specific stakeholders, including individuals directly seeking certification, and organizations involved in federal or tribal mining activities, might find both benefits and drawbacks:

• Positive Impact: By renewing the information collection project, OSMRE aims to maintain a high standard of safety and competence among blasters, directly benefiting mining communities and stakeholders concerned with safety regulations.

• Negative Impact: Potential applicants might face uncertainty due to ambiguous eligibility details and be discouraged by possible privacy issues when submitting feedback. Moreover, unclear time estimates could lead applicants to either rush through or overly lengthen their preparation times, affecting the quality of submissions.

In summary, while the renewal of the information collection process represents a necessary action to uphold vital safety regulations, addressing the outlined issues will be crucial for enhancing the process's clarity, efficiency, and public engagement.

The document under review pertains to the Certification of Blasters in Federal program states and on Indian lands as proposed by the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement. According to the information provided, there is an estimated annual nonhour burden cost of $1,370. This financial figure represents the ancillary costs associated with the process of obtaining or maintaining blaster certification and is not directly related to the time individuals spend responding to the information collection.

Financial Summary

The financial reference in the document is straightforward, highlighting an estimated cost burden placed on respondents. The $1,370 annual nonhour burden cost combines the likely expenses encountered by individuals aside from time—these may include materials, resources, or any fees related to completing the certification requirements. It suggests that obtaining or retaining certification incurs this financial liability annually, although the specifics about what this cost actually covers are not provided.

Financial Context in Relation to Identified Issues

While the document addresses the financial aspect of certification, there is a lack of detailed financial breakdown, which may leave some respondents uncertain about specific expenses. This could be related to one of the identified issues concerning the unspecified criteria used to assess applicant eligibility, as both lead to ambiguities in understanding the overall certification process.

Moreover, the estimated completion time per response, noted as 1 hour, misses a linked financial assessment. Since no specific tasks are detailed under this timeframe, individuals might have difficulty correlating their expected labor efforts with the nonhour burden costs presented. Although the financial reference offers a numerical obligation, understanding the precise allocation for these costs would better equip respondents to plan and budget effectively.

Lastly, the dual presentation of the comment submission address could indirectly affect perceived financial costs if misunderstandings lead to missed deadlines or extra expenses due to improper submission. Miscommunication in document instructions may translate into practical complications, possibly including unforeseen financial adjustments.

In conclusion, while the document provides a specific annual nonhour burden cost, it could benefit from further clarity and detail to help respondents navigate and manage the financial implications more effectively.