0648-0718 Supporting Statement Part A

SUPPORTING STATEMENT

U.S. Department of Commerce

National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration

NOAA Financial Assistance Performance Progress Reports

OMB Control No. 0648-0718

This request is for revision and three-year extension of a currently approved information collection. This request seeks to merge OMB Control No. 0648-0472 (NOAA Restoration Center) into 0648-0718, at which point 0648-0472 will be discontinued. NOAA also proposes to add a new collection of information for Coral Reef Conservation Program Performance Progress Reports, update the Marine Debris Program Performance Progress Report form, and revise the title of this information collection from NOAA Marine Debris Program Performance Progress Report to NOAA Financial Assistance Performance Progress Reports.

1. 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.

This information collection assists the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in the administration and evaluation of financial assistance awards made by the Coral Reef Conservation Program (CRCP), the NOAA Restoration Center (RC), and NOAA Marine Debris Program (MDP). Every year each of these programs support a variety of initiatives specific to their individual authorizations and programmatic mandates. This support is made substantially through grants and cooperative agreements, the terms and conditions of which require regular progress reporting and communication of project accomplishments to the agency. This information collection identifies what is to be provided in these reports, and aims to assist recipients in fulfilling their responsibilities in meeting interim and final progress report requirements. This information is also necessary for NOAA to effectively oversee the expenditure of public funds awarded through these programs, to ensure both cost-effectiveness and programmatic goals are met.

CRCP

The Coral Reef Conservation Act of 2000 (16 U.S.C. 6401 et seq.) was enacted on December 14, 2000, to preserve, sustain and restore the condition of coral reef ecosystems; to promote the wise management and sustainable use of coral reef ecosystems to benefit local communities and the Nation; to develop sound scientific information on the condition of coral reef ecosystems and the threats to such ecosystems; to assist in the preservation of coral reefs by supporting conservation programs, including projects that involve affected local communities and non-governmental organizations; to provide financial resources for those programs and projects; and to establish a formal mechanism for the collecting and allocating of monetary donations from the private sector to be used for coral reef conservation projects. Under section 6403 of the Act, the Secretary is authorized to provide matching grants of financial assistance for coral reef conservation projects. Section 408(c) of the Act authorizes at least $8,000,000 annually for financial assistance projects under the Program.

NOAA RC

The NOAA Restoration Center supports habitat restoration activities and applicant groups. Awards are made as grants or cooperative agreements under the authority of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, 16 U.S.C. 661, as amended by the Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1970, the Magnuson-Stevens Reauthorization Act of 2006 (Title 1, Sec. 117), the Estuaries and Clean Waters Act of 2000 (Title I, Public Law 106-457), amendments to the Water Resources Development Act of 2007, and other authorities. Applications for federal financial assistance are submitted via the grants.gov website using the required OMB-approved federal application forms. Funding recommendations are typically determined through a competitive process involving technical merit review and ranking of the applications. Review considers specific program priorities, pre-and post-restoration monitoring to detect short- and long-term ecological and socioeconomic outcomes. To evaluate a basic level of ecological success, NOAA expects a minimum level of short-term evaluation parameters to include one or more of the following: acres restored; stream miles opened for fish passage; or another, similar measure that describes the significance of the proposed actions. NOAA further encourages outcome-based long-term performance measures, including improved fish habitat quality; increased abundance of target species; impact on status of listed species and species of concern; changes in recreational angling; and similar parameters. NOAA restoration specialists work with successful applicants to incorporate long-term monitoring parameters into select projects to facilitate outcome level analysis of specific project types (fish passage, hydrological reconnection, coral reef and shellfish habitat).

NOAA MDP

The NOAA Marine Debris Program (MDP) supports national and international efforts to research, prevent, and reduce the impacts of marine debris. The MDP is a centralized office within NOAA that coordinates and supports activities, both within the bureau and with other federal agencies that address marine debris and its impacts. In addition to inter-agency coordination, the MDP uses partnerships with state and local agencies, tribes, non-governmental organizations, academia, and industry to investigate and solve the problems that stem from marine debris through research, prevention, and reduction activities, in order to protect and conserve our nation’s marine environment and coastal economies, and to ensure navigation safety. In large part, these partnerships are made through grants, cooperative agreements, contracts, MOUs or are simply informal technical assistance arrangements.

The Marine Debris Research, Prevention, and Reduction Act (33 U.S.C. 1951 et seq.) as amended by the Marine Debris Act Amendments of 2012 (P.L. 112-213, Title VI, Sec. 603, 126 Stat. 1576, December 20, 2012) authorizes the MDP to enter into cooperative agreements and contracts and provide financial assistance in the form of grants to carry out the purposes of the Act – namely to identify, determine sources of, assess, reduce, and prevent marine debris and its adverse impacts on the marine environment and navigation safety. To date, both competitive and non-competitive funding opportunities have been implemented by MDP to conduct such program activities. These funding opportunities provide federal funding to non-federal applicants throughout the coastal United States and territories.

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.

As mentioned above, the terms and conditions of the financial assistance awarded by these programs require regular progress reporting and communication of project accomplishments to program staff. In accordance with 2 C.F.R. 200.328, for grants and cooperative agreements, the NOAA Grants Management Division (GMD) requires a semi-annual reporting frequency (twice per year), and that grantees report on both programmatic accomplishments and financial expenditures. Program offices may determine when in a calendar year reports are to be submitted to the agency. At the end of an award, a final report comprehensive to the entire project is due to the program office. For all other (non-grant/contract) efforts conducted directly by the programs or by their partners, data collection and reporting requirements are determined based on the specific activities being conducted. The reporting forms are submitted through GrantsOnline.

Progress reports contain information related to, among other things, the overall short and long-term goals of a given project, project methods and monitoring techniques, actual accomplishments, status of approved activities, challenges or potential roadblocks to future progress, and lessons learned. This information collection enables the programs to monitor and evaluate the activities they support to ensure accountability to the public and to ensure that federal funds are used consistent with the purpose for which they were appropriated. It also ensures that reported information is standardized in such a way that allows for it to be meaningfully synthesized across a diverse set of projects and project types. The programs use the information collected in a variety of ways to communicate with federal and non-federal partners and stakeholders on individual project and general program accomplishments. It enables program staff, who are subject matter and technical experts on their respective programmatic issues to understand how effective projects are at accomplishing their objectives, and to provide technical assistance if needed throughout the life of a project so as to maximize the impact of federal funds or technical assistance. Recipients may also use this information collection to gather project results on sub-awards from sub-recipients.

Reporting on project accomplishments has been a requirement for these programs for all grants they have made, and while specific reporting metrics may have been refined over the years, they have not changed substantially.

NOAA will retain control over the information and safeguard it from improper access, modification, and destruction, consistent with NOAA standards for confidentiality, privacy, and electronic information. See response to Question 10 of this Supporting Statement for more information on confidentiality and privacy. The information collection is designed to yield data that meet all applicable information quality guidelines. Prior to dissemination, the information will be subjected to quality control measures and a pre-dissemination review pursuant to Section 515 of Public Law 106-554.

CRCP

Collection activities for this program are outlined below and include revision of performance reporting methods to include a standard program-specific template and indicator tracking report.

Performance Progress Reports: 2 C.F.R. 200.329 requires the Federal award recipients to relate accomplishments to performance goals and objectives of the Federal award at an interval required by the Federal awarding agency. The Department of Commerce Standard Financial Assistance Terms and Conditions (2020) requires these reports to be submitted on a semi-annual basis for the periods ending March 31 and September 30 unless otherwise specified in a specific award condition. The requirements of these reports and frequency are not new, however, the Coral Reef Conservation Program is seeking OMB approval for a format specific to the program so that we may track and report on progress toward the objectives and indicators of the new CRCP Strategic Plan (2018).

NOAA RC

The NOAA Restoration Center (RC) staff use the information collection to populate a project tracking database (The Restoration and Conservation Database, or RCDB). This database was first established in 2001 and updated in 2013 to increase its functionality and utility for the RC. Results of staff queries to the database are currently used by NOAA management to respond to Department of Commerce, Congressional and constituent inquiries, and provide an accurate accounting of NOAA’s performance measure reporting under the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) ‘acres restored’ measure. The database tracks sources and amounts of funding, volunteer numbers and hours contributed toward projects; provides a subset of project data to the public through the Restoration Atlas on the internet; and promotes planning through a web-based Geographic Information System (GIS) mapping function. Project data is shared with the public once RCDB information has been verified by technical staff.

The NOAA RC has not changed the collection tool since the last submission. The program still uses two targeted forms. The Performance Progress Report form, the original collection tool, focuses on tracking project-level implementation, milestones, performance measures, monitoring, and project expenditures. The Administrative Progress Report form applies only to recipients implementing multiple projects. Recipients use the form to document information on the administration of the award, the number of projects supported by the award, and overall award expenditures.

Recipients continue to be required to provide information in a two-part process consisting of a progress report narrative and form-fillable fields for specific project or award data. The narrative and data fields are included in a single form. Both the Performance Progress Report form for projects and the Administrative Progress Report form for awards with multiple projects follow this format.

The guidance for use of these forms encourages recipients to complete multiple Performance Progress Report forms when an award has multiple, geographically separate project sites or several distinct projects at one site. In the past, some recipients had done this and found it to streamline reporting for each project site and take less time than compiling all of the information into one form. The Federal Program Officer will help recipients determine the most efficient way to use the form for their award to minimize burden.

When multiple Performance Progress Report forms are used, the recipient also completes the Administrative Progress Report form. This form provides the recipient a place to document its management under a single RC financial award. Recipients or sub-recipients complete an individual Performance Progress Report form for each project listed in the project table of the Administrative Progress Report form. The Administrative Progress Report form is used to track the overall budget for the NOAA award, whereas the budget section of the Performance Progress Report form is used to track the approved and actual expenditures at the project level.

NOAA MDP

For the NOAA MDP, this is a revision from a previous, OMB-approved form. No changes have been made to the reporting form except the inclusion of an optional marine debris removal data collection page. This part of the form includes 10 new fields to report on the specific type of marine debris removal information needed to satisfy NOAA MDP reporting needs (for removal efforts only). This section intends to clarify and more clearly organize information that is normally generated during removal activities and which has historically been part of the information provided to NOAA MDP in removal progress reports. It is also optional, meaning that some grant projects will not generate relevant removal data, or some grantees may have their own acceptable reporting structure for such removal data.

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.

Progress reports are form-fillable PDF files that are populated, saved, and updated using Adobe software and a personal computer. Grantees or other interested members of the public may access the form either by going to each program’s website, or may contact each program to have the form(s) emailed to them by the project’s Federal Program Officer. Form users must have access to a personal computer and internet connection in order to fill out the form and submit it. At the very least a personal computer and internet connection are required to access the form so that it may be printed out if electing to submit a paper copy. For grants, NOAA strongly encourages that these forms are submitted electronically via the NOAA Grants Online system to facilitate the review, revision and approval processes. The forms themselves do not require that the user have access to any other additional technology beyond a personal computer and internet connection, although the quality of the report may be enhanced by such technology. For example, the reporting form does request that geographic coordinates of project locations be provided. Internet mapping tools are powerful enough to provide a sufficient level of detail for this requirement, however more precise measurements may be taken by handheld GPS units used in situ during project activities that would give NOAA a better representation of where a project takes place.

Forms may be found at the following locations:

CRCP - https://coralreef.noaa.gov/conservation/managegrant.html (after approval)

NOAA RC - https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/habitat-conservation/resources-noaa-restoration-center-applicants

NOAA MDP - www.marinedebris.noaa.gov

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 Question 2

Because this information collection is directly linked to understanding progress of specific project activities funded or otherwise supported by these programs, there is very little likelihood that this information collection would be a duplication of an existing tool. There is a small chance that NOAA’s reporting requirements could duplicate reporting requirements that a grantee might have to other funding sources for their funded project, if it is indeed being funded by multiple sources with similar progress reporting conditions. The duplication in such cases would likely be minimal however, or at least the burden would be insignificant since NOAA does not request any information beyond what would also likely serve a grantee’s reporting requirements to their other sources. Because the information collected pertains to recent accomplishments for a given award, it is not already available from some other source and must be provided according to the reporting schedule.

For NOAA RC awards, based on discussions that the NOAA RC has had with staff from other federal programs that undertake similar types of granting activities related to habitat and fisheries and that collect project-specific data, no evidence of duplication of information collection could be found. NOAA and The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Habitat programs have worked to better align their respective databases (NOAA’s RCDB and FWS HaBITS) to standardize data fields and definitions to enable meaningful comparison of habitat data. Recipients that receive project funding from more than one agency indicated that this information collection did not duplicate information collected by other agencies, as funds tend to go toward different project components; in fact, recipients found that NOAA’s information collection was often useful in helping them report on project status to their other funding sources. The information provided to NOAA by recipients is unique to each project and progress report, and is typically used by recipients to report on project status to interested parties outside NOAA.

Additionally, NOAA conducted a review of its information collections and identified 0648-0718 and 0648-0472 as both collecting Performance Progress Reports. In an effort to reduce duplication, NOAA is revising 0648-0718 to merge collection 0648-0472 and add a new CRCP performance progress report.

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

NOAA provides specific instructions to, and works with all partners (regardless of organization type), at the start of a project to identify the most critical elements of the project on which they will be reporting. This prevents the likelihood of a grantee submitting unnecessary information and minimizes the burden on recipients. Furthermore, by establishing reporting parameters up front, there is agreement at the outset of what the reporting requirements will be. This is to ensure that NOAA better understands the project implementation plan, and that partners understand, agree to, and have a hand in shaping their reporting responsibilities under the award. Additionally, only successful applicants are required to submit interim and final progress reports. The information to be collected is basic in its nature and has not historically created a hardship or burden for small entities that receive NOAA funds. The reporting forms’ instructions are in a format that is 508 compliant to decrease the burden of using these forms for people with disabilities.

6. Describe the consequences to the Federal program or policy activities if the collection is not conducted or is conducted less frequently.

If the information collection is not conducted or is conducted less frequently, the ability to account for the expenditure of federal funds for project activities supported by the agency would be substantially diminished. Project evaluations would be informed only by periodic but infrequent site visits by regional program staff and ad hoc updates otherwise provided to NOAA. Additionally, it will not meet the standards of 2 CFR 200.328 and the NOAA Grants Management Division for semi-annual reporting, and would make it more difficult to determine and correct poor grantee performance, since less frequent collection provides insufficient information to monitor awards to ensure Federal monies are properly used.

If the collection is not approved, standardizing what information each program can collect on a project would be difficult, time-consuming, and may not be as meaningful especially if it is an incomplete picture of a project’s progress.

The agency’s ability to maintain the public trust and ensure accountability of public funds would be meaningfully reduced. The information used by NOAA to communicate to agency, executive and congressional stakeholders about the disposition and efficacy of program funds would be informed by an inferior level of detail and confidence. The quality of agency-required performance metrics would diminish / be inaccurate.

Altering collection frequency may also inhibit timely responses to Freedom of Information Act requests that may be submitted.

7. Explain any special circumstances that require the collection to be conducted in a manner inconsistent with OMB guidelines.

This collection will be conducted in a manner consistent with OMB guidelines.

8. If applicable, provide a copy and identify the date and page number of publications 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 describe actions taken by the agency in response to these comments. Specifically address comments received on cost and hour burden.

The NOAA RC (0648-0472) published a 60-day notice (86 FR 30444) of requested extension to the Federal Register for this information collection on June 8, 2021. No comments were received.

The NOAA MDP (0648-0718) published a 60-day notice of requested extension to the Federal Register for this information collection on May 21, 2021. The comment period expired July 20, 2021 (86 FR 27561). No comments were received.

NOAA reached out to a number of individuals 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. NOAA received one response with comments in regards to form 0648-0472, including that the form is easy to follow, includes appropriate and reasonable questions, and that the estimated time for completion was reasonable if not an over estimate of the time it takes to complete the form. NOAA received three responses with comments in regards to form 0648-0718, indicating overall positive responses to the form’s intended purpose, frequency, clarity and relevance.

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

No payments or gifts will be provided to respondents of this information collection other than remuneration of contractors or recipients implementing projects supported through these programs.

10. Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents and the basis for the assurance in statute, regulation, or agency policy. If the collection requires a systems of records notice (SORN) or privacy impact assessment (PIA), those should be cited and described here.

The information collection does not request confidential information, or personally identifiable information beyond the name and organization details of the project’s principal investigator. The information collection may be used by NOAA to publicly communicate about the accomplishments of the project, and this is stated on the information collection form. As such, progress reports may be posted to program websites or other data archives to accomplish those communication goals.

The information collection does not request any proprietary or confidential information.

The collection of this information is covered by the Privacy Act System of Records Notices DEPT-2, Accounts Receivable and GSA/GOVT-9, System for Award Management.

11. Provide additional justification for any questions of a sensitive nature, such as sexual behavior or 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.

No such sensitive information is requested or collected.

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

As a part of the burden calculation, NOAA reached out to recipients for input into the level of effort required to complete these forms, and the below calculations are based on those requests. Some recipients said they think that these reports take less time to complete than NOAA estimates, and some think the reports take more time to complete, especially the initial report for an award. NOAA took these comments into account when calculating burden hours and allocated more burden for the initial report compared to the interim reports. Recipients did not view the completion of the Progress Reports as a significant burden, and some commented that the reports are less time consuming than report formats NOAA has used in the past. Many comments praised the use of a template and guidance for organizing goals and progress on grant activities.

Between new grantees and existing grantees, NOAA estimates that, for the three programs under this collection, about 580 respondents will each report between two and four times per year. Grantees who have been consulted on the burden requirements have indicated that it would take, on average, between 2.75 and 10 hours to collect and report on all the information required by this collection. This equates to an overall average of approximately 7 hours per report. Since reporting is required twice per year, we estimate that 20 hours per year is required, per grantee, to satisfy NOAA’s reporting requirements, totaling 4,545 hours per year. The grantees that NOAA consulted for these figures have experience in submitting previous versions of this reporting form for their NOAA grants, as such these estimates are based on actual time requirements.

Information Collection	Type of Respondent (e.g., Occupational Title)	# of Respondents (a)	Annual # of Responses / Respondent (b)	Total # of Annual Responses (c) = (a) x (b)	Burden Hrs / Response (d)	Total Annual Burden Hrs (e) = (c) x (d)	Hourly Wage Rate (for Type of Respondent) (f)	Total Annual Wage Burden Costs (g) = (e) x (f)
Marine Debris Program Semi-Annual Reports	Biological Scientist	70	2	140	10	1400	$ 44.01	$ 61,614.00
Coral Reef Conservation Program Semi-Annual Reports	Biological Scientist	65	2	130	10	1300	$ 44.01	$ 57,213.00
Restoration Center Progress Report - Initial	Biological Scientist	30	1	30	9.5	285	$ 44.01	$ 12,542.85
Restoration Center Progress Report - Semi Annual	Biological Scientist	200	1	200	5.5	1100	$ 44.01	$ 48,411.00
Restoration Center Progress Report - Final	Biological Scientist	30	1	30	9.75	292.5	$ 44.01	$ 12,872.93
Restoration Center Administrative Progress Report - Initial	Biological Scientist	5	1	5	6	30	$ 44.01	$ 1,320.30
Restoration Center Administrative Progress Report - Semi-Annual	Biological Scientist	40	1	40	2.75	110	$ 44.01	$ 4,841.10
Restoration Center Administrative Progress Report - Final	Biological Scientist	5	1	5	5.5	27.5	$ 44.01	$ 1,210.28
Totals				580		4545		$ 200,025.46

Table 1. Q 12 Estimates of the hour burden of the collection of information.

13. Provide an estimate for the total annual cost burden to respondents or record keepers resulting from the collection of information. (Do not include the cost of any hour burden already reflected on the burden worksheet).

There are no capital/start-up or ongoing operation/maintenance costs associated with this information collection. If the effort is supported by NOAA funding, any cost requirements for a personal computer or internet connection may be supported through the NOAA grant. Reports are submitted through Grants Online, which does not require a paid subscription or any other cost to the grantee.

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.

CRCP

It is anticipated that seven contract staff (full-time employees, or FTE) will devote no more than 5% of their time annually to review and approve performance progress reports. Additionally, four federal staff (full-time employees, or FTE) will devote no more than 10% of their time annually to review and approve performance progress reports for awards assigned, as well as approve performance progress reports for awards assigned to contractors. Review time varies by competition and staff have a wide range of the number of awards recipients under their purview so the estimate provided is based on the average staff member’s time overall and not the average amount of time required per report.

NOAA RC

It is anticipated that twenty restoration specialists (full-time employees, or FTE) will devote no more than 5% of their time annually to input the information collected into a database, one GIS specialist FTE will devote no more than 10% of their time annually to update quality controlled data and maintain GIS maps and webpage links, and supervise and task a contractor, and that one contractor will provide 10% of their time to maintain the database, work on change requests and subsequent enhancements and version releases. Assumptions are as follows:

20 restoration FTEs X ($150,000 annual average salary) X (5% of their time) = $150,000

1 GIS FTE X ($150,000 annual average salary) X (10% of his or her time) = $15,000

1 IT contractor X ($120,000 annual average salary) X (10% of his or her time) = $12,000

The annualized cost to the Federal government to conduct this information collection is estimated to be $120,000. No equipment, overhead, printing or other costs should be involved with the processing of this information collection. RCDB was upgraded and a new version was released in August 2012. Cognos, the reporting function for the RCDB was updated for increased functionality in April 2018. This enhancement enables more powerful queries and faster responses to answer specific questions, and subsequent releases will incorporate key monitoring and evaluation data to allow evidence-based evaluation of program effectiveness.

NOAA MDP

Annualized costs to the government due to the NOAA progress reporting process result from the amount of time it takes for NOAA staff to review and approve a report. Two NOAA MDP staff review each report submitted. It takes anywhere from 15 to 60 minutes to review a report, depending on the amount of detail provided, and the amount of supplementary materials (maps, PSAs, graphs, monitoring reports, etc…) provided. This is an average of 37.5 minutes per reviewer, per report. This leads to a total of 75 minutes of review, per report. Assuming an average annual salary of $135,000, this equals about 8% of that average position for all 70 anticipated semi-annual information collections.

Cost Descriptions	Grade/Step	Loaded Salary / Cost	% of Effort	Fringe (if Applicable)	Total Cost to Government
Federal Oversight
MDP Oversight	ZA-4/1 (x1)	$150,000.00	4%		$ 6,000
CRCP Oversight	ZA-3/3 (x 1)	$150,000.00	10%		$ 15,000
CRCP Other Federal Positions	ZA-4/1 ( x 3)	$150,000.00	10%		$45,000
Restoration Center	ZA-3/3 (x20)	$150,000.00	5%		$ 150,000
Restoration Center GIS Specialist	ZP-3/3 (x1)	$150,000.00	10%		$ 15,000
Contractor Cost
MDP Contractor Cost (x3)		$130,000.00	4%		$ 15,600
CRCP Contractor Cost (x 7)		$75,000.00	5%		$26,250
Restoration Center		$120,000.00	10%		$ 12,000
Travel
Other Costs:
TOTAL					$ 284,850

Table 2. Q 14 Estimates of the hour burden of the collection of information.

15. Explain the reasons for any program changes or adjustments reported in ROCIS.

This collection incorporates the reporting forms for both the NOAA RC and MDP, which have been previously approved under separate collection numbers.

CRCP

A new standardized semi-annual report is being added to this collection. The response burden being used for that report is the same as is reported for the NOAA Marine Debris Program progress report since that is the basis for the CRCP progress report. If needed, NOAA will update the response time at the next renewal.

The number of respondents, responses, and time burden has been updated to correct the methodology used to calculate those numbers. Previously, all merit reviewers’ time was included. This was an inaccurate estimate as it did not separate Federal and contract staff from the public and counted all merit reviews for each application instead of just review of relevant Federal agencies, State governments, or other government jurisdiction with jurisdiction or management authority over coral reef ecosystems in the area where the project is to be conducted as required by the Coral Reef Conservation Act of 2000. The NOAA federal and contractor staff information has been removed from the estimates below, resulting in a decrease in burden for those areas.

The annual cost to the federal government was also recalculated in this revision to more accurately reflect the time and effort of the government spent on this collection. The previous government cost was cited as $4,458.

NOAA RC

There are no program changes. The burden hour estimates remain the same as the 2018 renewal.

There are minor adjustments to the salary level of federal program staff used to calculate the annualized cost to the federal government.

NOAA MDP

There are no program changes.

There are minor adjustments to the salary level of federal program staff used to calculate the annualized cost to the federal government.

Information Collection	Respondents		Responses		Burden Hours		Reason for change or adjustment
	Current Renewal / Revision	Previous Renewal / Revision	Current Renewal / Revision	Previous Renewal / Revision	Current Renewal / Revision	Previous Renewal / Revision
Marine Debris Program Semi-Annual Reports	70	70	140	140	1400	1400	No Change
Coral Reef Conservation Program Semi-Annual Reports	65	0	130	0	1300	0	New collection
Restoration Center Progress Report - Initial	30	30	30	30	285	285	The 'Previous Renewal' numbers are from IC 0648-0472. There are no changes to the estimates for this collection of information from the previous renewal.
Restoration Center Progress Report - Semi Annual	200	200	200	200	1100	1100
Restoration Center Progress Report - Final	30	30	30	30	292.5	292.5
Restoration Center Administrative Progress Report - Initial	5	5	5	5	30	30
Restoration Center Administrative Progress Report - Semi-Annual	40	40	40	40	110	110
Restoration Center Administrative Progress Report - Final	5	5	5	5	27.5	27.5
Total for Collection	445	380	580	450	4545	3245
Difference	65		130		1300

Table 3. Q 15 Program changes / adjustments.

Information Collection	Labor Costs		Miscellaneous Costs		Reason for change or adjustment
	Current	Previous	Current	Previous
Marine Debris Program Semi-Annual Reports	$ 61,614.00	Not previously calculated	$ -	$ -	Labor Costs were calculated using BLS Occupational Employment Data.
Coral Reef Conservation Program Semi-Annual Reports	$ 57,213.00	$ -	$ -	$ -	New collection
Restoration Center Progress Report - Initial	$ 12,542.85	$ 11,400.00	$ -	$ -	Labor Costs were updated using BLS Occupational Employment Data.
Restoration Center Progress Report - Semi Annual	$ 48,411.00	$ 44,000.00	$ -	$ -	Labor Costs were updated using BLS Occupational Employment Data.
Restoration Center Progress Report - Final	$ 12,872.93	$ 11,700.00	$ -	$ -	Labor Costs were updated using BLS Occupational Employment Data.
Restoration Center Administrative Progress Report - Initial	$ 1,320.30	$ 1,200.00	$ -	$ -	Labor Costs were updated using BLS Occupational Employment Data.
Restoration Center Administrative Progress Report - Semi-Annual	$ 4,841.10	$ 4,400.00	$ -	$ -	Labor Costs were updated using BLS Occupational Employment Data.
Restoration Center Administrative Progress Report - Final	$ 1,210.28	$ 1,100.00	$ -	$ -	Labor Costs were updated using BLS Occupational Employment Data.
Total for Collection	$ 200,025.46	$ 73,800.00	$ -	$ -
Difference	$ 126,225.46		$ -

Table 4. Q 15 Program changes / adjustments.

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 results of this collection will not be published. A subset of the information is however made available to the public on a variety of platforms. The NOAA RC may use the Restoration Center’s Restoration Atlas at https://restoration.atlas.noaa.gov/src/html/index.html, where the public can view projects by location or habitat type, see the project location on a map, and review an abstract of the project including funding information, project partners, and a contact for more information. The NOAA MDP may put final reports or other publications submitted as deliverables under the grant on the NOAA MDP website (marinedebris.noaa.gov). It may also be housed in the NOAA Marine Debris Clearinghouse (https://clearinghouse.marinedebris.noaa.gov). The CRCP may publish final reports to the Coral Reef Information System (CoRIS; https://www.coris.noaa.gov) if they are of high quality and relevant to the public, but generally do not publish performance progress reports and reserve CoRIS publications for products and reports that have already been made available to the public.

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.

The agency plans to display the expiration date for OMB approval of the information collection on all instruments.

18. Explain each exception to the certification statement identified in “Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions.

The agency certifies compliance with 5 CFR 1320.9 and the related provisions of 5 CFR 1320.8(b)(3).