FR 2021-03632

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is seeking to extend its information collection activities related to the Exchange Network Grants Progress Reports. This effort requires approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act. Public comments are invited to evaluate the necessity and effectiveness of this information collection, with a deadline for submissions set for April 26, 2021. The proposal intends to ensure that state, tribal, and territorial environmental government offices report accurately and consistently on their projects' progress and outcomes.

General Overview

The document prioritizes the continuation of collecting data through semi-annual progress reports and quality assurance forms from grantees involved in environmental projects. The goal is to track the completion of project objectives and address any emerging issues in a timely manner. EPA also aims to maintain oversight of how these projects achieve their stated environmental outcomes and meet specific quality standards.

Significant Issues and Concerns

Several concerns arise from the document:

1. Cost Transparency: The document estimates an annual cost of $15,765.91 for conducting the information collection but does not describe how this figure was calculated. Understanding the cost breakdown is crucial for assessing the program's efficiency and proper use of resources.

2. Reporting Frequency: The decision to require reporting twice yearly for the Semi-Annual Progress Report Form could be questioned for its frequency. Such a reporting schedule might pose a burden, particularly if significant progress or changes are uncommon within this timeframe.

3. Ambiguity in Problem Reporting: The instructions for reporting problems encountered are vague, which could lead to discrepancies in how challenges are documented by different grantees. Clearer guidelines could improve the accuracy and usefulness of the reports.

4. Decreased Respondent Burden: The noted decrease in reported burden stems from fewer active grants, which might indicate a decline in program activity. This could point to potential inefficiencies or lower demand for these grants, warranting a closer examination of program implementation.

5. Simplification Claimed, Yet Undefined: While the document suggests simplifying the Quality Assurance Reporting Form, it lacks details on what changes will be made and how they will benefit grantees or improve data quality.

Broader Public Impact

The proposed extension of information collection reflects the EPA's commitment to leveraging data for environmental betterment. For the general public, it signifies ongoing federal oversight into environmental initiatives, potentially leading to enhanced environmental protection outcomes more closely aligned with public interests.

Stakeholder Implications

For the state, tribal, and territorial environmental offices serving as respondents, the extension seeks to ensure accountability and transparency in meeting the objectives of federally funded projects. These stakeholders may experience mixed impacts; while continued reporting maintains funding and oversight, it might also increase administrative burdens without demonstrable adjustments to ease these pressures.

Overall, this document underscores the necessity of input from public stakeholders to ensure the collection methods are efficient and the data collected effectively serves the EPA's environmental mission.

The document presents a detailed proposal by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regarding the information collection request for the Exchange Network Grants Progress Reports. Financial references within the document highlight specific aspects of the project's budget and estimated costs.

Summary of Financial Spending and Appropriations

The EPA estimates a total annual cost of $15,765.91 for the Exchange Network Grants Progress Reports. This figure reportedly includes neither annualized capital nor operation and maintenance costs. Additionally, there is a slight reduction in annual respondent costs, decreased by $421, which is attributed to a reduced number of open grants, from 172 to 149, expected to be active per year during the period under review. The reduction in costs interestingly offsets inflation in labor rates, revealing meticulous financial planning by the EPA.

Financial Allocations and Related Issues

A critical issue with the financial references in the document is the lack of detail concerning how the estimated cost, $15,765.91 per year, was derived. Without transparency or breakdown of this cost, it becomes challenging to assess the necessity or efficiency of these expenditures. This lack of clarity might lead to questions regarding whether resources are being utilized in the most cost-effective way.

Another financial aspect linked to identified issues is the $421 reduction in total annual respondent costs due to fewer open grants. This decrease may imply an underutilization or a lack of demand for the grants, suggesting potential inefficiencies in the program's implementation. This situation may warrant further examination to ensure that the funds are being optimized to support a sufficient number of projects.

The document makes references to ensuring the minimization of burdens through certain procedural efficiencies, yet it provides no specific financial guidelines or changes in the grant management process. Consequently, while the document alludes to financial prudence, the exact measures to achieve reduced administrative burden and associated costs are not detailed.

In conclusion, while the EPA's effort to maintain and possibly extend the Exchange Network Grants Progress Reports is apparent from the financial allocation references, greater transparency in cost estimation and clearer explanations of changes in respondent burden are essential for an understandable and assessable budgetary plan.