FR 2024-28921

The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), a part of the Department of Transportation, has announced its intention to forward an Information Collection Request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. This activity is in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, which mandates transparency and public engagement in federal data collection efforts. The notice, which appeared in the Federal Register, outlines the nature of the request, involves a collection of data related to grants management and cooperative agreements, and invites public feedback on its anticipated impacts.

General Summary

The announcement serves to inform the public that the FRA seeks approval for collecting specific data regarding its grant programs, which fund a variety of railway projects. This collection aims to support effective oversight and ensure the responsible use of federal funds by measuring project performance and expenditures. Despite providing a 60-day period for public input, as required by the PRA, no comments were received, indicating possible missed engagement opportunities.

Significant Issues and Concerns

A notable issue with the notice is the lack of public engagement, as evidenced by the absence of comments during the initial comment period. This could indicate either a shortfall in outreach or an overwhelming complexity in the document that discourages participation. Additionally, the document's technical language, particularly regarding the adjustment of burden hours and the elimination of certain standard forms, may impede comprehension for the lay reader. The significant reduction in the estimated number of responses also lacks a clear, comprehensible explanation, potentially undermining transparency.

Furthermore, the document assumes familiarity with federal regulations and terms such as the "Build America, Buy America (BABA)" requirements and their relationship with the National Institute of Standards and Technology—Manufacturing Extension Partnership (NIST-MEP). This assumption may not hold true for all stakeholders, leading to potential misunderstanding.

Impact on the Public and Stakeholders

For the general public, the document's heavy use of bureaucratic language and reference to specific forms without sufficient explanation could alienate citizens who might otherwise offer valuable feedback. Such barriers to understanding may discourage public participation in governance processes that affect public resources.

Specific stakeholders, such as state and local governments or railroads, stand to gain or lose from the proposed data collection, based on the effectiveness and clarity of the information gathered. If the FRA can successfully streamline and clarify the reporting process, these stakeholders could benefit from reduced administrative burdens. However, if the complexity remains unmitigated, it might increase the risk of non-compliance or hindered participation, thus diminishing the potential effectiveness of the FRA's grant program.

Overall, while the FRA's proposal strives for improvements in oversight and accountability of railroad project funding, the challenges in public engagement and comprehension present significant obstacles that need addressing to maximize the initiative's success.

The Federal Register document discusses an Information Collection Request (ICR) from the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and provides details about the financial implications. Here is an overview of how money is addressed in the document and how these references relate to the identified issues.

Financial Overview

The document highlights that the Total Estimated Annual Burden Hour Dollar Cost Equivalent for the information collection is $1,309,550. This cost is derived from the hourly wage rate of a Management Analyst, as per the Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics. Specifically, the rate used is $47.80 per hour, with an additional 29.4% overhead rate, leading to a fully burdened wage rate of $61.85 per hour.

Financial Calculation and Transparency

The document provides a detailed breakdown of how the dollar cost equivalent is calculated. However, the explanation is technical, involving detailed references to wage rates and overhead percentages. This complexity may be difficult for the general public to understand fully, possibly detracting from transparency and raising questions among stakeholders unfamiliar with such calculations.

Additionally, the significant reduction in the estimated annual responses from 11,001 to 4,762 and the corresponding decrease in burden hours are noted without a detailed financial rationale. This omission could affect the clarity around how these adjustments impact the overall cost burden and whether the financial allocations are justified.

Implications for Public Engagement

The report indicates that no public comments were received during the 60-day comment period. This lack of engagement might reflect low public awareness or understanding of the financial allocations involved. A clearer explanation of the cost implications and how public input can influence financial decision-making may encourage greater community involvement.

Conclusion

Financial references in the document present a picture of calculated estimates related to administrative costs within the FRA's grant management requirements. Although the document provides figures and cost calculations, the complexity and lack of context might hinder full public comprehension and transparency. Efforts to simplify these explanations and explicitly connect financial details to decision-making processes could enhance public insight and accountability.