Overview
Title
Agency Information Collection Activities: Notice of Request for Reinstatement of Previously Approved Information Collection
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The Federal Highway Administration wants to hear what people think about a project that checks how well they are doing at making traffic better and air cleaner. They are asking everyone to share their thoughts by June 2, 2025.
Summary AI
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is seeking public comments on reinstating a previously approved information collection. This collection is related to the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ) Project Tracking System, which compiles details on CMAQ projects, including their impact on air quality and congestion. The FHWA is required by the Paperwork Reduction Act to publish this notice in the Federal Register. Comments should be submitted by June 2, 2025.
Abstract
The FHWA has forwarded the information collection request described in this notice to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for a reinstatement of an information collection previously approved. 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) has issued a notice seeking public comments on the reinstatement of an information collection related to the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ) Project Tracking System. This notice, required by the Paperwork Reduction Act, aims to gather insights on the data collection efforts required for tracking various CMAQ projects. The initiative collects information about the projects, including their cost, impact on air quality, congestion reduction, and their overall cost-effectiveness. The deadline for public comments on this request is June 2, 2025.
Significant Issues or Concerns
One of the primary concerns with the document is the absence of specific criteria for evaluating the cost-effectiveness of the projects regarding emissions reductions and congestion mitigation. This lack of clarity could result in inconsistencies in how different states report their data. Additionally, the document mentions discovering a malicious comment classified as potential malware but does not provide details on how this threat was addressed, which could raise security concerns for stakeholders.
The estimated average burden per response, calculated at 15 minutes per project entry, lacks detail about the methodology or processes used to arrive at this estimate. Without this information, there may be doubts about the accuracy of the time and effort assessment required for these reports. Furthermore, the language inviting public comments is somewhat formal; using more straightforward language might encourage broader participation by those not accustomed to technical or bureaucratic jargon.
Finally, there is also a concern about the accuracy and quality of the data collected in the CMAQ Project Tracking System. The documentation does not elaborate on the measures in place to ensure that the data submitted is both accurate and reliable, which may affect the integrity and usefulness of the information being collected.
Impact on the Public and Stakeholders
Broadly, the public stands to benefit from the CMAQ Project Tracking System as it aims to create transparency and track the performance and impact of projects that influence air quality and congestion. The project database should provide valuable insights into the effectiveness of public funds used for transportation projects aimed at reducing emissions and traffic congestion.
Specific stakeholders, such as state transportation departments, are directly involved as they will be responsible for compiling and submitting detailed reports. Although the consistent reporting structure may eventually lead to improved data-driven decisions, in the interim, disparities in understanding cost-effectiveness criteria and report preparation workloads may pose challenges.
Additionally, uncertainty regarding the addressing of security issues might concern stakeholders who are wary of data integrity and privacy issues. Simplifying the language used in public communications may increase public trust and participation in commenting, which would enrich the quality of feedback and ultimately enhance the overall data collection process.
In conclusion, while the reinstatement of this data collection initiative could lead to significant advancements in understanding and enhancing transportation projects, several issues regarding clarity, security, and public engagement need to be addressed to ensure its efficacy and acceptance.
Issues
• The document does not specify the criteria for evaluating the cost-effectiveness of the projects regarding reductions in emissions and congestion, which may lead to inconsistent data reporting.
• The document mentions that a comment was classified as malicious activity and potential malware for data exfiltration without explaining how this was addressed, potentially causing security concerns.
• The estimated average burden per response is specified, but the process or methods used to determine this estimate are not detailed, which could raise questions about its accuracy.
• The language used in the section on public comments invited is somewhat formal and could be more accessible with simpler language to encourage broader public engagement.
• The document does not explain how data accuracy and quality are maintained in the CMAQ Project Tracking System, which may be a concern for the integrity of the information collected.