Preliminary Case Study Assessing Economic Benefits of Marine Debris Reduction

ICR 201705-0648-005

OMB: 0648-0756

Federal Form Document

Forms and Documents
Document
Name
Status
Form
New
Supplementary Document
2017-07-28
Supplementary Document
2017-07-28
Supplementary Document
2017-07-28
Supplementary Document
2017-07-28
Supplementary Document
2017-07-28
Supplementary Document
2017-07-28
Supplementary Document
2017-05-11
Supplementary Document
2017-05-11
Supporting Statement B
2017-08-04
Supporting Statement A
2017-08-04
IC Document Collections
IC ID
Document
Title
Status
226799 New
226798 New
ICR Details
0648-0756 201705-0648-005
Historical Active
DOC/NOAA
Preliminary Case Study Assessing Economic Benefits of Marine Debris Reduction
New collection (Request for a new OMB Control Number)   No
Regular
Approved with change 08/04/2017
Retrieve Notice of Action (NOA) 05/11/2017
This collection is approved for one-time collection of data from Orange County, CA beaches to expand NOAA’s knowledge of user attitudes and knowledge about marine debris and the potential effects on visitor behavior as part of a regional pilot study, “The Economic Impacts of Marine Debris on Tourism-dependent Communities”. Previously, NOAA collected information for a “Pilot Study of Beach Recreation in Orange County” (Leggett et al. 2014) regarding marine debris in Orange County, California . This collection serves as a Pre-test to the proposed Regional Pilot Study previous study and includes additional questions that were not part of Leggett et al. (2014) by presenting visual information to respondents and asking hypothetical behavior questions regarding their last summer beach trips. NOAA requested to conduct pilot studies in the following regions: Northeast (Barnstable (MA), Dukes (MA) and Nantucket (MA)); Mid-Atlantic (Kent (DE), Sussex (DE), Wicomico (MD), Worcester (MD), and Accomack (VA)); Southeast (Horry (SC) and Georgetown (SC)); Gulf of Mexico (Mobile (AL) and Baldwin (AL)); California (Santa Cruz (CA) and Monterey (CA)); Pacific Northwest (Grays Harbor (WA), Pacific (WA), Clatsop (OR), and Tillamook (OR)); and Great Lakes (Lucas (OH), Ottawa (OH), Erie (OH), Lorain (OH), and Cuyahoga (OH)); OMB is not approving one-time collection of data from these regions at this time, pending the results of the Orange County Pre-test that inform the practical utility of this collection and any possible revisions to the regional Pilot Study design including survey questionnaire changes and sampling frame redesign that may flow from the results of the Orange County Pre-test. This is a Pre-test of a Regional Pilot Study to further the research on methods and the results are not appropriate to extrapolate outside the sample of the study. Upon the completion of this Pre-test, NOAA must submit to OMB results of the Pre-test including: (1) overall cumulative response rate using one of the AAPOR definitions; (2) item non-response rates for key questions including all hypothetical behavioral questions; (3) results of probing the respondents on how respondents reacted to the pictures used in the questionnaire including whether they thought the pictures were reasonable, reflective of what they actually saw at the beaches, whether the scale and/or concentration used in the pictures are appropriate (e.g., the actual number of debris/m2 vs. the number of debris shown in unknown physical dimension); (4) results of probing the respondents about how confident they are of their responses to the hypothetical behavior questions; (5) results of probing the respondents about whether they believe the level of marine debris is a problem; (6) results of probing the respondents about whether they believe presence of marine debris is indicative of bad water quality; (7) results of internal scope tests. If OMB approves the extension of the Pre-test into other regions, results of external scope tests should be submitted as site characteristics of the beaches may be used; (8) results of preliminary nonresponse assessments using zip code information should be submitted. If OMB approves the extension of the Pre-test into other regions, NOAA must submit information on their nonresponse bias follow-up study including which key attitudinal questions are used to reweigh the results in addition to the usual demographic variables. If NOAA concludes that a nonresponse bias follow-up study is not warranted due to the preliminary nature of the Regional Pilot Study, NOAA must provide justification for this decision including what information the Regional Pilot Study is likely to produce to inform future agency products and decisions; (9) provide results of the different modeling analysis the researchers conducted; (10) provide justification for the primary econometric model and results chosen including how the model might account for the intensity of use among users, whether the value of marine debris reduction might accrue more to users who live near the beaches (e.g., day trips) rather than users who do not live near the beaches (e.g., overnight trips) if OMB approves the extension of the Pre-test into other regions.
  Inventory as of this Action Requested Previously Approved
08/31/2020 36 Months From Approved
726 0 0
56 0 0
0 0 0

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is requesting approval for a new information collection to conduct a mail survey of households in eight coastal locations in the continental United States. The eight locations include the seven coastal communities that are the focus of the study (Table 1) plus Orange County, California, which was the location for the Preliminary Case Study Assessing Economic Benefits of Marine Debris Reduction (OMB Control No. 0648-0681 (IEc 2014). The proposed eight study locations are (1) Northeast; (2) Mid-Atlantic; (3) Southeast; (4) Gulf of Mexico; (5) Great Lakes; (6) Pacific Northeast; and (7) California (2 locations). The survey instrument for this study will combine a selection of questions from the Orange County survey (IEc 2014) with new contingent behavior questions developed specifically for this study. The survey data will be combined with a national model of coastal recreation, which relies on data collected for the Deepwater Horizon oil spill assessment, to estimate the economic impacts of marine debris on tourism-dependent communities. The economic impacts to be evaluated include changes in the number of trips, the value of beach recreation to those who visit the beach, and changes in tourism spending (also called regional economic impacts) associated with an increase or decrease in the number of recreational trips.

US Code: 33 USC 1951 et seq. Name of Law: Marine Debris Research, Prevention and Reduction Act of 2006
  
None

Not associated with rulemaking

  82 FR 11346 02/22/2017
82 FR 21982 05/11/2017
No

2
IC Title Form No. Form Name
On-site interview NA On-site interview
Mail survey NA, NA, NA Orange County Questionnaire ,   Mail survey ,   Marine Debris Mail Survey

  Total Approved Previously Approved Change Due to New Statute Change Due to Agency Discretion Change Due to Adjustment in Estimate Change Due to Potential Violation of the PRA
Annual Number of Responses 726 0 0 726 0 0
Annual Time Burden (Hours) 56 0 0 56 0 0
Annual Cost Burden (Dollars) 0 0 0 0 0 0
Yes
Miscellaneous Actions
No
This is a new information collection.

$342,087
Yes Part B of Supporting Statement
No
No
No
No
Uncollected
Amy Uhrin 240 533-9426

  No

On behalf of this Federal agency, I certify that the collection of information encompassed by this request complies with 5 CFR 1320.9 and the related provisions of 5 CFR 1320.8(b)(3).
The following is a summary of the topics, regarding the proposed collection of information, that the certification covers:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
    (i) Why the information is being collected;
    (ii) Use of information;
    (iii) Burden estimate;
    (iv) Nature of response (voluntary, required for a benefit, or mandatory);
    (v) Nature and extent of confidentiality; and
    (vi) Need to display currently valid OMB control number;
 
 
 
If you are unable to certify compliance with any of these provisions, identify the item by leaving the box unchecked and explain the reason in the Supporting Statement.
05/11/2017


© 2024 OMB.report | Privacy Policy