0170-ciap-08-ss [1]

Supporting Statement for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions

Coastal Impact Assistance Program

OMB Control Number 1010-0170

Current Expiration Date: 30 November 2009

Terms of Clearance: None

General Instructions

A Supporting Statement, including the text of the notice to the public required by 5 CFR 1320.5(a)(i)(iv) and its actual or estimated date of publication in the Federal Register, must accompany each request for approval of a collection of information. The Supporting Statement must be prepared in the format described below, and must contain the information specified in Section A below. If an item is not applicable, provide a brief explanation. When statistical methods are employed, Section B of the Supporting Statement must be completed. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) reserves the right to require the submission of additional information with respect to any request for approval.

Specific Instructions

A. Justification

1. Explain the circumstances that make the collection of information necessary. Identify any legal or administrative requirements that necessitate the collection. Attach a copy of the appropriate section of each statute and regulation mandating or authorizing the collection of information.

With the passage of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct), the Minerals Management Service (MMS) was given responsibility for the Coastal Impact Assistance Program (CIAP) through the amendment of Section 31 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1356a Appendix A). The following requirements from this amendment necessitate the collection of information.

“(d) AUTHORIZED USES.–

(1) IN GENERAL.–A producing State or coastal political subdivision shall use all amounts received under this section, including any amount deposited in a trust fund that is administered by the State or coastal political subdivision and dedicated to uses consistent with this section, in accordance with all applicable Federal and State law, only for 1 or more of the following purposes:

(A) Projects and activities for the conservation, protection, or restoration of coastal areas, including wetland.

(B) Mitigation of damage to fish, wildlife, or natural resources.

(C) Planning assistance and the administrative costs of complying with this section.

(D) Implementation of a federally-approved marine, coastal, or comprehensive conservation management plan.

(E) Mitigation of the impact of outer Continental Shelf activities through funding of onshore infrastructure projects and public service needs.

(2) COMPLIANCE WITH AUTHORIZED USES.–If the Secretary determines that any expenditure made by a producing State or coastal political subdivision is not consistent with this subsection, the Secretary shall not disburse any additional amount under this section to the producing State or the coastal political subdivision until such time as all amounts obligated for unauthorized uses have been repaid or reobligated for authorized uses.

(3) LIMITATION- Not more than 23 percent of amounts received by a producing State or coastal political subdivision for any 1 fiscal year shall be used for the purposes described...”

In September 2006, CIAP draft guidelines were written which were then amended. As this program has evolved and developed, more information needs to be submitted by the government jurisdictions to meet all the requirements of the CIAP State Plan Guidelines as well as requirements on the procurement contracts.

Therefore, this information collection request (ICR) revises the original ICR to include the additional information needed to fulfill the requirements of the MMS CIAP grant program.

2. Indicate how, by whom, and for what purpose the information is to be used. Except for a new collection, indicate the actual use the agency has made of the information received from the current collection. [Be specific. If this collection is a form or a questionnaire, every question needs to be justified.]

The CIAP legislation appropriates money for eligible states and coastal political subdivisions for coastal restoration/improvement projects. The MMS shall disburse $250 million to eligible producing states and coastal political subdivisions (CPSs) through a grant program. Each state is allocated funds based on their portion of offshore OCS revenues in comparison to the total qualified offshore OCS revenues. Alabama, Alaska, California, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas are the only eligible states under EPAct. Counties, parishes, or equivalent units of government within those states lying all or in part within the coastal zone, as defined by section 304(1) of the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) 1972, as amended, are the coastal political subdivisions eligible for CIAP funding, a total of 67 local jurisdictions, along with the 6 states.

According to the EPAct, in order to receive funds, the states must submit CIAP State Plans that contain required components including an implementation plan of the state’s program and identification of the proposed use of CIAP funds. The identification will be provided in the Plan as brief descriptions of the proposed projects. Upon approval of a Plan, recipients will be able to submit grant applications for a project. Applicants submit proposals for funding in response to a Notice of Funding Availability that we publish on Grants.gov and on our program web pages. Proposals are submitted through Grants.gov, e-mail, or mail. An application consists of OMB required forms for grants; a detailed project description or narrative to demonstrate that the project has maintained the integrity of the brief description in the Plan and still meets EPAct criteria; and documentation such as Federal, State, or local government required permits with which the recipient is stating it has met Federal, State, or local laws.

Many of the eligible states and CPSs are experienced in Federal grant applications and are familiar with the OMB forms and project narrative request.

Once an application for a project is approved, the MMS is required to monitor the projects to determine that the CIAP funds are being used for appropriate expenses. The monitoring will be achieved through the grant regulations that require, at a minimum, a recipient to provide an annual progress and financial status reports. Recipients are evaluated by contracting officers via Grants.gov application efforts. The recipients that are determined by the evaluations to likely have difficulties in implementing and managing the CIAP funded projects will be required to submit semi-annual reports. Once the recipient has demonstrated the ability to implement and manage their projects, the requirement can be returned to annual reports.

A group of program technical experts will review each application to determine how well it addresses the requirements identified in the authorizing EPAct legislation and they will monitor the projects to meet specific requirements.

3. Describe whether, and to what extent, the collection of information involves the use of automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses, and the basis for the decision for adopting this means of collection. Also describe any consideration of using information technology to reduce burden [and specifically how this collection meets GPEA requirements].

We expect 75 percent electronic submission of all information. All application instructions and forms needed for Grants.gov are available on the web for filing and printing by the respondents. The MMS allows submittal of all supporting documentation electronically.

4. Describe efforts to identify duplication. Show specifically why any similar information already available cannot be used or modified for use for the purposes described in Item 2 above.

Due to the unique nature of the requirements of EPAct, no other Federal agency collects this information. If proposed projects are ongoing efforts initiated with other funds that are now expended, it is possible that the body of requested information already exists and would only require minimal updating. It is impossible for MMS to know this for certain until the recipients determine how they propose to spend the CIAP funds.

5. If the collection of information impacts small businesses or other small entities, describe any methods used to minimize burden.

The information requested has to be sufficient to fulfill the requirements of the EPAct. We do not feel the amount of information requested will have significant impact on small entities as they will be providing the minimum amount of information needed. The recipients of the funds are State or local government level agencies and offices only.

6. Describe the consequence to Federal program or policy activities if the collection is not conducted or is conducted less frequently, as well as any technical or legal obstacles to reducing burden.

The information requested is necessary to fulfill the responsibilities of the Secretary of the Interior under EPAct. Without the collection and analysis of the requested information, the appropriateness of a project cannot be determined. The EPAct has set forth criteria that must be met prior to release of funds or in a monitoring effort to determine that funds have been used appropriately.

7. Explain any special circumstances that would cause an information collection to be conducted in a manner:

(a) requiring respondents to report information to the agency more often than quarterly.

Not applicable in this collection.

(b) requiring respondents to prepare a written response to a collection of information in fewer than 30 days after receipt of it.

Not applicable in this collection.

(c) requiring respondents to submit more than an original and two copies of any document.

Not applicable in this collection.

(d) requiring respondents to retain records, other than health, medical, government contract, grant-in-aid, or tax records, for more than 3 years.

Not applicable in this collection.

(e) in connection with a statistical survey, that is not designed to produce valid and reliable results that can be generalized to the universe of study.

Not applicable in this collection.

(f) requiring the use of statistical data classification that has been reviewed and approved by OMB.

There are no special circumstances with respect to 5 CFR 1320.5(d)(2)(v) through (viii) as the collection is not a statistical survey and does not use statistical data classification.

(g) that includes a pledge of confidentiality that is not supported by authority established in statute or regulation, that is not supported by disclosure and data security policies that are consistent with the pledge, or which unnecessarily impedes sharing of data with other agencies for compatible confidential use.

This collection does not include a pledge of confidentiality not supported by statute or regulation.

(h) requiring respondents to submit proprietary trade secrets or other confidential information unless the agency can demonstrate that it has instituted procedures to protect the information’s confidentiality to the extent permitted by law.

This collection does not require proprietary, trade secret, or other confidential information not protected by agency procedures.

8. If applicable, provide a copy and identify the date and page number of publication in the Federal Register of the agency’s notice, required by 5 CFR 1320.8(d), soliciting comments on the information collection prior to submission to OMB. Summarize public comments received in response to that notice [and in response to the PRA statement associated with the collection over the past 3 years] and describe actions taken by the agency in response to these comments. Specifically address comments received on cost and hour burden.

Describe efforts to consult with persons outside the agency to obtain their views on the availability of data, frequency of collection, the clarity of instructions and recordkeeping, disclosure, or reporting format (if any), and on the data elements to be recorded, disclosed, or reported. [Please list the names, titles, addresses, and phone numbers of persons contacted.] Consultation with representatives of those from whom information is to be obtained or those who must compile records should occur at least once every 3 years – even if the collection of information activity is the same as in prior periods. There may be circumstances that may preclude consultation in a specific situation. These circumstances should be explained.

As required in 5 CFR 1320.8(d), MMS provided a 60-day notice in the Federal Register on February 11, 2008 (73 FR 7759). Also, 30 CFR 250.199 and the Paperwork Reduction Act explain that the agency, in this case MMS, will accept comments at any time on the information collected and the burden. We display the OMB control number and provide the address for sending comments to MMS. We received no comments in response to the Federal Register notice or unsolicited comments from respondents covered under these requirements.

Only a select few states (six total), and their boroughs, parishes, etc. (67), can qualify for funds under the CIAP. The funds can be applied only towards projects that meet at least 1 of 5 criteria specified by EPAct. The six states were sent copies of the MMS CIAP State Plan guidelines. The guidelines are also located at http://www.mms.gov/offshore/CIAPmain.htm.

During the comment period, MMS regional offices consulted with several respondents on the potential burden of collecting this information. All reported no problems with clarity of instructions, frequency of collection, or availability of data. The burden estimates in section A.12 reflect previous experience on the part of the potential respondents, submitting similar types of actions on other grant programs. Estimates were received from the following:

Kathy Smartt, CIAP Team Leader, Texas General Land Office,

(512) 475-1552, P. O. Box 12428, Austin, TX 78711

Chris Potter, CIAP Coordinator, California Resources Agency,

(916) 654-0536, 1416 Ninth Street, Suite #1311, Sacramento, CA 95814

Randy Bates, Acting Director, Office of Project Management and Permitting, State of Alaska,

(907) 465-8797, 302 Gold Street, Suite #202, Juneau, AK 99801

9. Explain any decision to provide any payment or gift to respondents, other than remuneration of contractors or grantees.

We will not provide payment or gifts to respondents in this collection.

10. Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents and the basis for the assurance in statute, regulation, or agency policy.

We protect proprietary information according to the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552) and its implementing regulations (43 CFR 2); also the information that will be provided to MMS is already a matter of public record.

11. Provide additional justification for any questions of a sensitive nature, such as sexual behavior and attitudes, religious beliefs, and other matters that are commonly considered private. This justification should include the reasons why the agency considers the questions necessary, the specific uses to be made of the information, the explanation to be given to persons from whom the information is requested, and any steps to be taken to obtain their consent.

The collection does not include sensitive or private questions.

12. Provide estimates of the hour burden of the collection of information. The statement should:

(a) Indicate the number of respondents, frequency of response, annual hour burden, and an explanation of how the burden was estimated. Unless directed to do so, agencies should not conduct special surveys to obtain information on which to base hour burden estimates. Consultation with a sample (fewer than 10) of potential respondents is desirable. If the hour burden on respondents is expected to vary widely because of differences in activity, size, or complexity, show the range of estimated hour burden, and explain the reasons for the variance. Generally, estimates should not include burden hours for customary and usual business practices.

(b) If this request for approval covers more than one form, provide separate hour burden estimates for each form and aggregate the hour burdens.

There are approximately six states and 67 parishes, boroughs, counties, etc. Submissions are annually, bi-annually, or specific to the requirement which is usually on occasion. We estimate that the total annual reporting and recordkeeping burden is 13,339 burden hours.

Burden Table

CIAP Reporting and/or Recordkeeping Requirement	Hour Burden	Average No. of Annual Reponses	Annual Burden Hours
Submit Project Narrative.	42	192 projects	8,064
Submit annual Performance Reports.	8	192 reports	1,536
Submit bi-annual performance reports.	8	192 reports	1,536
Notify MMS in case of delays, adverse conditions, etc., which impair ability to meet objectives of the award including statement of action take or contemplated or assistance required (included non-construction and construction grants).	8	45 notifications	360
Request termination and supporting information.*	6	7 requests	42
Retain all records/documentation for 3 years.*	.5	192 projects	96
Retain records longer than 3 years if they relate to claim, audit, litigation, etc.	Exempt under 5 CFR 1320.4(a)(2), (c)		0
Telephone follow-up discussion on Financial Capabilities.	8	76 discussions	608
Develop language and individual signage at CIAP Sites – Estimated 30 construction projects with temp signs initially – permanent signs 2-4years.*	8	30 signs	240
Submission of photographs/cds of projects for tracking purposes.*	4	200 projects	800
Voluntarily submit draft Coastal Impact Assistance Plan with appropriate supporting documentation.	1	4 plans	4
Submit final Coastal Impact Assistance Plan and all supporting documentation (i.e., Governor’s certification of public participation; Appendices C, D, and E).	1	4 plans	4
Request delay by states for submitting final plan, with relevant data.	1	1 request	1
Request minor changes and/or amendments to a plan.	8	6 requests	48
Subtotal		1,141 Responses	13,339 Hours

*Initially determined that this will be minimal burden until more respondents are actively involved in a CIAP project.

(c) Provide estimates of annualized cost to respondents for the hour burdens for collections of information, identifying and using appropriate wage rate categories. The cost of contracting out or paying outside parties for information collection activities should not be included here. Instead, this cost should be included in Item 14.

The average respondent cost is $57 (rounded)/hour. This cost is broken out in the below table using the Bureau of Labor Statistics* data for the Austin, TX area. See BLS website: http://www.bls.gov/bls/wages.htm.

Position	Level	Hourly Pay rate ($/hour estimate)	Hourly rate including benefits (1.4** x $/hour)	Percent of time spent on collection	Weighted Average ($/hour)
General Office Clerk	7	$20	$28	5%	$1
Grant Managers*	10	$33	$46	45%	$21
Program Manager*	13	$50	$70	50%	$35
Weighted Average ($/hour)					$57

* Please note that this BLS source reflects their last update from April 2005 and is calculated using the Professional Specialty Occupation.

** A multiplier of 1.4 (as implied by BLS news release USDL 07-1883, December 11, 2007) was added for benefits.

Based on a cost factor of $57 per hour, we estimate the total annual cost to government entities is $760,323 (13,339 hrs x $57 per hour = $760,323).

13. Provide an estimate of the total annual [non-hour] cost burden to respondents or recordkeepers resulting from the collection of information. (Do not include the cost of any hour burden shown in Items 12 and 14).

(a) The cost estimate should be split into two components: (1) a total capital and start-up cost component (annualized over its expected useful life) and (2) a total operation and maintenance and purchase of services component. The estimates should take into account costs associated with generating, maintaining, and disclosing or providing the information [including filing fees paid]. Include descriptions of methods used to estimate major cost factors including system and technology acquisition, expected useful life of capital equipment, the discount rate(s), and the time period over which costs will be incurred. Capital and start-up costs include, among other items, preparations for collecting information such as purchasing computers and software; monitoring, sampling, drilling and testing equipment; and record storage facilities.

(b) If cost estimates are expected to vary widely, agencies should present ranges of cost burden and explain the reasons for the variance. The cost of purchasing or contracting out information collection services should be a part of this cost burden estimate. In developing cost burden estimates, agencies may consult with a sample of respondents (fewer than 10), utilize the 60-day pre-OMB submission public comment process and use existing economic or regulatory impact analysis associated with the rulemaking containing the information collection, as appropriate.

(c) Generally, estimates should not include purchases of equipment or services, or portions thereof, made: (1) prior to October 1, 1995, (2) to achieve regulatory compliance with requirements not associated with the information collection, (3) for reasons other than to provide information or keep records for the government, or (4) as part of customary and usual business or private practices.

We have identified no paperwork non-hour cost burden for this collection of information.

14. Provide estimates of annualized cost to the Federal Government. Also, provide a description of the method used to estimate cost, which should include quantification of hours, operational expenses (such as equipment, overhead, printing, and support staff), and any other expense that would not have been incurred without this collection of information. Agencies also may aggregate cost estimates from Items 12, 13, and 14 in a single table.

The average Federal cost is $75/hour. This cost is broken out in the below table using the 2008 Office of Personnel Management pay schedule for the DC metro area.

Position	Grade	Hourly Pay rate ($/hour estimate)	Hourly rate including benefits (1.5* x $/hour)	Percent of time spent on collection	Weighted Average ($/hour)
Program Manager	GS-14/5	$53	$80	33%	$26
Grant Manager	GS-14/5	$53	$80	33%	$26
Grant Officer	GS-13/5	$45	$68	34%	$23
Weighted Average ($/hour)					$75

* A multiplier of 1.5 (as implied by BLS news release USDL 07-1883, December 11, 2007) was added for benefits.

To analyze and review the informa­tion, the Government spends an average of 2 hours for each hour spent by respondents. The total estimated Government time is 26,678 hours. Based on a cost factor of $75 per hour, the total annual estimated burden on the Government is $2,000,850 (13,339 hours x 2 hours = 26,678 hours x $75 = $2,000,850).

15. Explain the reasons for any program changes or adjustments.

The currently approved OMB inventory includes 12,600 burden hours for this collection. This submission requests 13,339 burden hours.

There is an adjustment decrease of -4,536. This decrease is due to re-estimating the annual number of responses relating to project narratives.

There is a program increase of +5,275 burden hours which includes additional information needed to make sure the criteria identified in EPAct is addressed accordingly.

Therefore, with this ICR, we are requesting a net +739 increase in annual burden hours.

16. For collections of information whose results will be published, outline plans for tabulation and publication. Address any complex analytical techniques that will be used. Provide the time schedule for the entire project, including beginning and ending dates of the collection of information, completion of report, publication dates, and other actions.

The MMS will not tabulate or publish the data.

17. If seeking approval to not display the expiration date for OMB approval of the information collection, explain the reasons that display would be inappropriate.

Not applicable. We will display the expiration date.

18. Explain each exception to the “Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions”.

To the extent that the topics apply to this collection of information, we are not making any exceptions to the “Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions.”

9