Overview
Title
Agency Information Collection Activities: Request for Comments for a New Information Collection
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The government wants to ask people what they think about a new form that will help track how well projects using their money are doing, and they should share their thoughts by the end of January. They're trying to figure out the best way to do this, but they haven't exactly explained how they will make it easy for everyone or how they'll use people's ideas to make the process better.
Summary AI
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), part of the U.S. Department of Transportation, is seeking public comments on its plan to ask the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for approval to collect new information. This collection will involve using the FHWA Performance Progress Report (PPR) Form to track and report the performance and progress of projects funded by federal grants or cooperative agreements. The data collection is essential to ensure compliance with federal requirements and is required by the Paperwork Reduction Act. Comments should be submitted by January 31, 2025, and feedback on the necessity, burden, and potential improvements for the collection process is encouraged.
Abstract
The FHWA invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) approval for a new information collection, which is summarized below under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. We are required to publish this notice in the Federal Register by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), an agency within the U.S. Department of Transportation, has issued a notice requesting public comments on a proposed new information collection. The purpose of this collection is to gather data on the performance and progress of projects funded through federal grants or cooperative agreements via a tool called the Performance Progress Report (PPR) Form. This initiative seeks approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), in compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
General Summary
The proposed information collection will focus on projects funded by FHWA's discretionary grants and cooperative agreements. These grants are part of large federal efforts, such as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the Inflation Reduction Act, which aim to boost infrastructure development across the United States. The FHWA is seeking public comments on this process, especially concerning the necessity of the data collection, the accuracy of the estimated burdens, and potential improvements or reductions in respondent burden.
Significant Issues and Concerns
One of the notable concerns in the document is the lack of clarity and accessibility in its language. Terms like "Uniform Administrative Requirements in 2 CFR part 200" may be difficult for the general public to comprehend. Additionally, while the document estimates a substantial annual burden—100,000 hours—the rationale behind this calculation is not thoroughly explained or justified.
There's also limited information on specific mechanisms to ensure the accuracy of these burden estimates or methods to verify their realism. Moreover, while the notice suggests using electronic technology to minimize burden, it doesn't provide detailed strategies on how this will be implemented effectively.
Furthermore, the document does not elaborate on how public feedback will be used to improve the information collection process, beyond stating that comments will be summarized or included in the request to OMB. Without a transparent mechanism for utilizing public input, the effectiveness of this comment solicitation is questionable.
Impact on the Public
Broadly, the document could increase public awareness and involvement in how federal highway projects are monitored and assessed. By inviting public comments, the FHWA provides a channel for individuals and organizations to voice their concerns or suggestions on the grant processes that may impact infrastructure projects in their communities.
However, with its technical language and lack of clear engagement strategies, the notice may inadvertently limit meaningful public participation. To effectively gather input, the FHWA would benefit from simplifying communication and providing more context on how public comments can lead to tangible improvements.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
For stakeholders, such as state Departments of Transportation (DOTs), U.S. Territories, and Federally recognized tribes, these changes hold both potential benefits and challenges. On one hand, engaging with the FHWA's feedback process might offer these groups a chance to influence reporting requirements and ensure that they adequately reflect the realities of managing federally funded projects.
On the other hand, the significant administrative burden anticipated from the data collection process could impose additional strain on these entities, many of which already operate with limited resources. There's no mention of fairness measures during the grant selection process, posing potential biases, especially concerning smaller or less resource-rich jurisdictions.
In summary, while the FHWA's initiative to seek public input on its reporting processes is commendable, the overall approach could benefit from greater accessibility, transparency, and consideration of stakeholders' diverse capacities and challenges.
Issues
• The document provides no specific mechanisms for ensuring the accuracy of the estimated burden hours or methods to verify if the stated burdens are realistic.
• The language used in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section is technical and may be difficult for the general public to understand, particularly terms like 'Uniform Administrative Requirements in 2 CFR part 200'.
• There is no clear plan or strategies outlined for minimizing the burden on respondents, other than a general mention of using electronic technology.
• The document lacks specificity on how the FHWA plans to use public comments to improve the information collection process, other than summarizing or including them in the request to OMB.
• The estimated total annual burden hours seem quite high (100,000 hours) without a clear justification or breakdown of how this was calculated beyond a general description.
• The notice does not specify if any measures will be taken to ensure fairness and avoid bias in the selection process for grant recipients, particularly concerning state DOTs, U.S. Territories, and Federally recognized tribes.