Overview
Title
Agency Information Collection Activities; Notice and Request for Comment; Uniform Procedures for State Highway Safety Grant Programs
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration wants people to share their thoughts about their plan to keep collecting information to decide who gets highway safety grant money. This helps states make roads safer.
Summary AI
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is asking for public comments on its plan to seek approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for extending an existing information collection related to its State Highway Safety Grant Program. This program helps states improve highway safety by providing grants, and the information collected is necessary to evaluate whether states meet federal funding criteria. Comments can be submitted through various methods, including an online portal. The deadline for submission is April 12, 2021, and the feedback will help in assessing the necessity and effectiveness of the information collection.
Abstract
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) invites public comments about our intention to request approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for an extension of a currently-approved information collection. Before a Federal agency can collect certain information from the public, it must receive approval from OMB. Under procedures established by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, before seeking OMB approval, Federal agencies must solicit public comment on proposed collections of information, including extensions and reinstatement of previously approved collections. This document describes NHTSA's collection of information for its State Highway Safety Grant Program.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The document is a notice from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), which is part of the Department of Transportation. The NHTSA is inviting public comments on its plan to extend an existing information collection related to State Highway Safety Grant Programs. The goal of this grant program is to enhance highway safety by providing funding to states, and the collection of information is vital for determining if states qualify for these federal funds. Public comments on this proposal are an important part of the process, ensuring that the methodology used for information collection is necessary and efficient.
Summary of the Document
The notice serves as an official request from the NHTSA seeking public feedback before extending a current information collection related to State Highway Safety Grant Programs. The extension is subject to approval by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), as stipulated by the Paperwork Reduction Act, which mandates public consultation on any information collection. It outlines the procedures involved, including how and where the public can submit comments.
Significant Issues and Concerns
The document contains several areas that could benefit from clearer communication. The language and legal jargon used throughout the document may pose a challenge to the general public, potentially hindering meaningful engagement and the submission of comments. A simplification of the language could encourage more widespread participation.
The estimated costs associated with this information collection are notably high. The total labor costs for preparing application materials and conducting assessments are estimated to be over $2.4 million annually. This figure suggests that there may be room for efficiency improvements, possibly through the adoption of modern technology or streamlined processes.
The document also references several specific costs for assessments ($32,500 each, totaling $422,500 for planned assessments), but lacks a detailed breakdown or justifications for these amounts. Such transparency could help ensure that these costs remain competitive and reasonable.
Impact on the Public
For the general public, this document represents an opportunity to engage with government processes by providing feedback on how public funds are distributed for highway safety. Such engagement can help ensure that taxpayer money is used effectively and aligns with public interests. However, as mentioned earlier, the complexity and technical nature of the document may limit broader public participation unless addressed.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
State governments and agencies involved in highway safety will be directly impacted by the processes outlined in the document. For these stakeholders, the document is essential as it sets the framework for how they can apply for and receive critical funding to improve road safety. Ensuring that this process is both efficient and user-friendly is crucial as it can directly influence the safety initiatives and programs that states can undertake.
Subject matter experts and administrative assistants involved in the assessments are also key stakeholders. The document outlines the time commitment and costs associated with their roles, highlighting their importance in evaluating state programs. Nevertheless, variations in the number of assessors for traffic records assessments, ranging from 10 to 14, raise questions about consistency that could affect their workload and associated costs.
In conclusion, the NHTSA's request for comments on extending this information collection is a standard administrative procedure. Yet, it offers an important opportunity for stakeholders to voice opinions and seek improvements in efficiency and transparency, ultimately aiming to ensure the effective use of federal funds for highway safety.
Financial Assessment
The document discusses various financial aspects related to the collection of information for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's (NHTSA) State Highway Safety Grant Program. The financial references are multifaceted, involving labor costs, honorariums, and estimated total annual costs.
One of the main financial elements mentioned is the labor costs associated with preparing application materials. The Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that the average hourly wage for management analysts in State and local government is $31.95. However, considering that wages represent only 61.8% of total compensation costs, the NHTSA estimates the hourly labor cost at $51.70. This adjustment marks the preparation cost per respondent at $24,056. The total labor costs for all eligible states, should they participate fully, would amount to $1,855,099. This figure highlights possible inefficiencies or opportunities to streamline and reduce costs, as pointed out in the issues section.
The document further details costs associated with assessments. For occupant protection and impaired driving assessments, each state pays an honorarium of $2,700, equivalent to $33.75 per hour for each team member involved. An administrative assistant, paid $2,100, corresponds to an approximate hourly rate of $32.80. For traffic records assessments, NHTSA pays each assessor $2,100 for an estimated 16 hours of work, translating to $131.25 per hour. These diverse rates prompt questions about consistency and cost justification among the roles and assessment types.
The document estimates the total burden hours for this information collection at 44,826 hours, leading to associated labor costs of $2,440,089. This seems high and may reflect inefficiencies in the current processes. There is potential to improve these processes through technology, providing room for cost reductions.
Additionally, the document lists an estimated total annual burden cost of $422,500. This includes costs related to event stipends, travel, and per diem for subject matter experts. Each occupant protection or impaired driving assessment incurs costs of about $32,500, bringing into focus the significant financial commitment required for these evaluations.
The financial references in this document highlight various concerns and opportunities. High labor costs and the substantial budget for assessments underscore the need for a more detailed breakdown or justification to ensure cost-effectiveness. The discussion also raises questions about consistency in financial practices across different types of assessments and state participation levels, suggesting potential areas for improvement and transparency.
Issues
• The document uses complex language and legal jargon that may be difficult for the general public to understand, which could limit meaningful public engagement and comment.
• The estimated total labor costs for preparing application materials and assessments seem high ($2,440,089), and there might be opportunities to reduce costs through more efficient processes or technology.
• Specific costs such as $32,500 per assessment and $422,500 for planned assessments need further breakdown or justification to ensure they are competitive and non-excessive.
• There is no clarity on whether all eligible States always apply for all grants, which might lead to unnecessary estimates of burden hours and costs, potentially inflating the perceived necessity and budget.
• The frequent use of footnotes and references to external guidelines and laws may create confusion, especially if readers are not quick to access or fully understand these references.
• The number of assessors per traffic records assessment varies widely (10 to 14), raising questions about consistency and potential cost implications.
• There seems to be an inconsistency or lack of transparency in how often different sections of the grant applications can be submitted with a single application (e.g., multiple years for Section 405, single application annually for others).