FR 2024-28735

The document from the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE) presents a notice requesting public comments on its proposal to renew an information collection related to coal mining inspections. This initiative is part of the compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, which aims to reduce the paperwork burden imposed on individuals and entities by the federal government. The central purpose of this collection is to ensure that states are adhering to the regulations outlined in the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977. Public comments are invited until February 4, 2025, to assess the necessity and efficiency of the information collection, as well as potential improvements in the process.

Significant Issues and Concerns

Several notable issues emerge from the document. Firstly, the document does not clarify how public comments will be utilized or if there will be subsequent publications summarizing or addressing these comments. Such transparency could enhance public engagement and trust in the process.

Another concern is the variance in estimated response times, ranging from 1.5 to 10 hours, which lacks detailed justification. This wide range may cause confusion or skepticism about the collection's demands on respondents.

Additionally, the document indicates an "annual nonhour burden cost" of $625 but offers no explanation of this figure or its calculation. A clear breakdown of this cost could help stakeholders understand the financial implications better.

The document states the frequency of collection is "One time," which appears inconsistent given the presence of annual respondents and responses. Clarification on this point could address potential misunderstandings.

Finally, while there are instructions about withholding personal identifying information from public comments, the document could better detail the methods and limitations of ensuring commenter anonymity.

Broader Public Impact

The renewal of this information collection has implications for both the general public and specific stakeholders. At a broader level, the initiative serves as a tool for public accountability, ensuring that mining activities comply with environmental standards. The success and clarity of such processes can bolster public confidence in governmental oversight of environmental protection.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

Specific stakeholders, such as state governments and the coal mining industry, are most directly affected. For state governments, the information collection represents an obligation to document compliance effectively and may necessitate resource allocation for accurate reporting.

For individuals or entities involved in coal mining, the collection processes may impose additional operational burdens, particularly if not streamlined or justified. However, this can positively impact the industry by promoting transparency and potentially fostering better public relationships by demonstrating commitment to regulatory compliance.

In conclusion, while the document endeavors to enhance public involvement in regulatory compliance, greater clarity and justification in some areas could improve its efficacy and the public’s understanding of their role and the implications of these processes. Enhanced transparency and communication could facilitate a more engaged and informed response from affected parties.

In the reviewed document, the financial aspects primarily focus on the Total Estimated Annual Nonhour Burden Cost of $625. This cost is mentioned briefly without providing a detailed breakdown or justification for how this figure was derived, nor how it fits into the broader framework of the information collection process.

Financial Allocation

The $625 mentioned as the Total Estimated Annual Nonhour Burden Cost is intended to cover expenses outside of direct labor hours associated with this information collection. Typically, nonhour costs could include materials, printing, or delivery costs, but the document does not specify how these costs are allocated or calculated. The absence of a detailed explanation raises questions regarding what specific activities this amount covers.

Relation to Identified Issues

The lack of detailed justification for the $625 nonhour burden cost ties into one of the noted issues: the document does not provide a clear explanation of how this cost was determined. For individuals and state governments participating in the process, understanding this figure is crucial as it may impact their budgeting and resource allocation. Without transparency in how this cost is calculated, respondents might find it challenging to gauge the financial implications of their participation accurately.

Furthermore, the document states the frequency of collection as "One time", which is inconsistent with the annual respondent activities spelled out elsewhere. This discrepancy could imply that the $625 might not accurately reflect ongoing annual costs, leading to potential misunderstandings or underestimations of the financial burden over time.

Conclusion

The document's brief mention of the $625 reflects a need for further clarity and transparency regarding nonhour cost calculations. Providing more detailed financial breakdowns would allow stakeholders and respondents to better understand and prepare for the financial responsibilities of participating in the information collection process. Addressing these issues in future updates or follow-up publications could significantly enhance the comprehensibility and accuracy of the cost estimates provided.