1024-0034__supporting_statement_August_24_2010

Supporting Statement A for Paperwork Reduction Act Submission

OMB Control Number 1024-0034

Land and Water Conservation Fund On-Site Inspection Reports

Terms of Clearance: OMB approved this information clearance on August 8, 2007, with the following terms of clearance: None

1. Explain the circumstances that make collection of information necessary.

The Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (LWCF Act) (16 U.S.C 4601-4 et seq.) was enacted to help preserve, develop, and ensure access to outdoor recreation facilities. The LWCF Act provides funds for and authorizes Federal assistance to the States for planning, acquisition, and development of needed land and water areas and facilities.

In accordance with the LWCF Act, the National Park Service (we, NPS) administers the LWCF State Assistance Program, which provides matching grants to States, and through the States to local units of government. As used in this information collection request, the term “States” includes the 50 States; the Commonwealths of Puerto Rico and the Northern Mariana Islands; the District of Columbia; and the territories of Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and American Samoa.

LWCF grants are provided to States on a matching basis for up to 50 percent of the total project-related allowable costs. Grants to eligible insular areas may be for 100 percent assistance. The LWCF State Assistance Program gives maximum flexibility and responsibility to the States. States establish their own priorities and criteria and award their grant money through a competitive selection process based on a Statewide recreation plan. Payments for all projects are made to the State organization that is authorized to accept and administer funds paid for approved projects. Local units of government participate in the program as subgrantees of the State with the State retaining primary grant compliance responsibility.

As part of the administrative responsibilities of the LWCF State Assistance Program, on-site inspections of funded sites are required (see LWCF State Assistance Program Manual) to determine a project’s eligibility to receive LWCF assistance, to monitor the performance of grantees, and to ensure compliance with all requirements and regulations. The following on-site inspection reports must be submitted to NPS: pre-award reports, progress reports, final inspection reports and post-completion reports. No standard report format is required.

2. Indicate how, by whom, how frequently, and for what purpose the information is to be used. If the information collected will be disseminated to the public or used to support information that will be disseminated to the public, explain how the collection complies with all applicable Information Quality Guidelines.

It is the responsibility of States to administer a regular and continuing program of on-site inspections of projects. The scope, timing, and selectivity of these inspections are covered in an agreement negotiated by the NPS and the State. This agreement provides the basis for the conduct of pre-award, progress, and final on-site inspections. On-site inspection reports are prepared for all inspections conducted and are included in the official project files maintained by the State.

We use the reports to monitor the grant recipient’s projects to ensure that the projects are complying with all Federal regulations.

On-site inspection reports are submitted to the NPS on the following basis:

• Pre-award on-site inspection reports are completed by individuals who are knowledgeable about the resources of the site before the project begins.

• Progress on-site inspection reports are generally combined with the annual performance report or when grant payments are made.

• Final on-site inspection reports must be submitted to the NPS within 90 days after the date of completing a project and prior to final reimbursement and administrative closeout.

• Post-completion on-site inspection reports must be completed within 5 years after the final project reimbursement and every 5 years thereafter. If there are problems, the report should include a description of the discrepancy and the corrective action to be taken. Reports indicating problems are forwarded to the NPS for review and necessary action; all other reports are maintained in State files.

3. Describe whether, and to what extent, the collection of information 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 decisions 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.].

The on-site inspection reports may be mailed or emailed to the NPS.

4. Describe efforts to identify duplication.

There is no duplication of the information between this collection and collections by other entities because the data is project specific for the LWCF State Assistance Program.

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

The collection of information does not impact small businesses or other small entities.

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.

If we did not collect this information or collected it less frequently, program integrity would be jeopardized and the opportunity for fraud, waste and abuse of program funds could occur.

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

* requiring respondents to report information to the agency more often than quarterly;

* requiring respondents to prepare a written response to a collection of information in fewer than 30 days after receipt of it;

* requiring respondents to submit more than an original and two copies of any document;

* requiring respondents to retain records, other than health, medical, government contract, grant-in-aid, or tax records, for more than three years;

* 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;

* requiring the use of a statistical data classification that has not been reviewed and approved by OMB;

* 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; or

* 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.

None of the listed circumstances apply.

8. Provide 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 (or in response to a PRA statement) and describe actions taken by the agency in response to those comments.

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 name, titles, addresses, and phone numbers of persons contacted.

A notice announcing the extension of the collection and requesting public comments was published in the Federal Register on March 15, 2010 (75 FR 12253) for a 60-day period. The comment period ended on May 14, 2010. We received one comment. The commenter expressed concern that the report is negligent in design and does not protect taxpayers’ money and that the program is a waste of money that accomplishes nothing for the good of the American people.

Response: On-site inspection reports are one of the methods we use to determine a project’s eligibility to receive LWCF assistance, to monitor the performance of grantees, and to ensure compliance with all requirements and regulations. There is no standard report format. The State develops the on-site inspection report considering issues applicable to the specific project. An agreement negotiated between the NPS and the State covers the scope, timing, and selectivity of the inspections. If we discover that grant funds are being used improperly or the terms of the grant agreement are not being followed, we can withhold the State’s LWCF funding. In addition, if anyone believes that a State’s report may be incorrect or flawed, he or she should contact the appropriate NPS Regional Office.

Under the Land and Water Conservation Fund grants program, we have approved over 40,000 projects to support acquisition of open space for park lands or the development of outdoor recreation facilities in every geographic region of the United States, in every county, and in almost all localities. Seventy-five percent of the total funds obligated have gone to locally sponsored projects to provide close-to-home recreation opportunities that are readily accessible to America's youth, adults, senior citizens and the physically or mentally challenged. In addition to thousands of small recreation areas, grants have helped to acquire and develop new parks of Statewide or national significance.

In addition to the Federal Register notice, we contacted the following State LWCF employees and solicited comments about the on-site inspection reports. The consensus is that the estimated burden hours are accurate and the reporting guidance is clear.

Ms. Betty Ettinger

Assistant Chief, Office of Grants and Local Services

CA Dept. of Parks and Recreation

P.O. Box 942896

Sacramento, CA 94296

Telephone: 916-651-8174

betti@parks.ca.gov

Mr. Cleveland Hardman

Director of Outdoor Recreation, Office of State Parks

Department of Culture, Recreation and Tourism

P.O. Drawer 44426

Baton Rouge, LA 70804-4426

Telephone: 225-342-8188

chardman@crt.state.la.us

Ms. Antoinette Norfleet

Director of Grants

Div. of State Parks, Recreation, and Historic Sites

2 MLK Jr. Drive, Suite 1352

Atlanta, GA 30334

Telephone: 404-656-3830

antoinette_norfleet@dnr.state.ga.us

Also, through the National Association of State Outdoor Recreation Liaison Officers, an ongoing mechanism exists for direct input into program administration. No major problems with regard to these requirements have been identified.

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

No payments or gifts are given to respondents.

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

There are no assurances of confidentiality provided to respondents.

11. Provide additional justification for any question of a sensitive nature, such as sexual behavior and attitudes, religious beliefs, and other matters that are commonly considered private.

No sensitive questions are asked.

12. Provide estimates of the hour burden of the collection of information.

We are estimating 5,992 annual responses and 2,996 burden hours for this collection. The maximum number of respondents is 56 and the number of responses varies among the States. We estimate an average of 107 responses per respondent. We estimate the dollar value of the annual burden hours to be $195,219 (rounded) ($65.16 X 2,996 hours). It will take a State LWCF Coordinator approximately 30 minutes to complete the on-site inspection report. The mean hourly wage is approximately $43.44 based on the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wages, May 2009, http://www.bls.gov/oes/2009/may/oes111021.htm. A multiplier of 1.5 was added for benefits for State/local/tribal governments in accordance with BLS news release USDL 10-0774, June 9, 2010 (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ecec.pdf) resulting in an hourly wage of $65.16.

The annual burden estimate is summarized as follows:

13. Provide an estimate of the total annual [nonhour] cost burden to respondents or recordkeepers resulting from the collection of information.

There are no nonhour costs.

14. Provide estimates of annualized costs to the Federal Government.

The annual cost to the Federal Government is $167,956 (rounded) ($56.06 X 2,996 hours). We estimate that it will take an Outdoor Recreation Planner 30 minutes to review and process each report. The hourly rate for a GS-12/step 5 is $37.37, based on the Office of Personnel Management Salary Table 2010-RUS http://www.opm.gov/oca/10tables/pdf/rus_h.pdf . A multiplier of 1.5 was added for benefits in accordance with BLS news release USDL 10-0774, June 9, 2010 (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ecec.pdf), resulting in an hourly wage of $56.06.

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

We are reporting a decrease of 1,408 annual responses and 704 burden hours. This is an adjustment based on our experience in administering this collection over the last several years.

16. For collections of information whose results will be published, outline plans for tabulation and publication.

We do not publish this information.

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.

We will display the OMB control number and expiration date on appropriate materials.

18. Certification

There are no exceptions to the certification statement.