[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 78 (Monday, April 26, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22034-22036]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-08650]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration


Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for Review and Approval; Comment 
Request; Economic Analysis of Shoreline Treatment Options for Coastal 
New Hampshire

AGENCY: National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of information collection, request for comment.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce, in accordance with the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), invites the general public and other 
Federal agencies to comment on proposed, and continuing information 
collections, which helps us assess the impact of our information 
collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. The 
purpose of this notice is to allow for 60 days of public comment 
preceding submission of the collection to OMB.

DATES: To ensure consideration, comments regarding this proposed 
information collection must be received on or before June 25, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments to 
Adrienne Thomas, NOAA PRA Officer, at [email protected]. Please 
reference OMB Control Number 0648-0788 in the subject line of your 
comments. Do not submit Confidential Business Information or otherwise 
sensitive or protected information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or 
specific questions related to collection activities should be directed 
to Sarah Gonyo, National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science, NOAA's 
National Ocean Service, Building SSMC4, Room 9320, 1305 East-West 
Highway, Silver Spring, MD, 20910, Telephone (240) 533-0382 or 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Abstract

    This is a request for a revision to information collection 0648-
0788, sponsored by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 
(NOAA) National Center for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS). This 
collection will benefit the NOAA, Office of Coastal Management (OCM), 
and decision-makers on the state and local level in New Hampshire. NOAA 
will collect economic data pursuant to the Coastal

[[Page 22035]]

Zone Management Act (CZMA) and Digital Coastal Act.
    The New Hampshire Coastal Risk and Hazards Commission (CRHC) was 
established by the State Legislature through RSA 483-E on July 2, 2013. 
The purpose of the Commission, as stated in the law, is to ``recommend 
legislation, rules and other actions to prepare for projected sea-level 
rise and other coastal watershed hazards such as storms, increased 
river flooding and storm water runoff, and the risks such hazards pose 
to municipalities and the state assets in New Hampshire.'' Further, in 
carrying out this charge, the Commission is specifically directed to 
``review National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and other 
scientific agency projections of coastal storm inundation and flood 
risk to determine the appropriate information, data, and property 
risks'' to incorporate into its recommendations.
    In 2016, the CRCH recommended the development of a ``comprehensive, 
integrated New Hampshire Coastal Shoreline Management Plan (CSMP) that 
presents general priorities for coastal shoreline management, as well 
as site-specific and place-based strategies including, where 
appropriate, protection, adaptation, and abandonment.'' Following a New 
Hampshire Shoreline Management workshop organized by GBNERR in 2014 and 
consistent with CRHC Recommendation BL6, NHCP has prioritized living 
shoreline assessment and implementation in its five-year strategy to 
enhance coastal management (309 Strategy, 2015) and set a longer-term 
goal to develop a Tidal Shoreline Management Plan (TSMP) for New 
Hampshire.
    The National Ocean Service (NOS) proposes to collect economic data 
to document perceived effects of weather and climate events and 
adaptation strategies, to assess probable public benefits that would be 
derived from shoreline treatment options within coastal New Hampshire, 
and to establish a baseline for future monitoring of NOAA's success in 
meeting its mandates and obligations.
    Respondents will be randomly sampled from households (1) within New 
Hampshire, (2) within block groups in Maine adjacent to the Piscataqua 
River, and (3) within block groups in Massachusetts adjacent to the 
Hampton-Seabrook Estuary. Questions will explore such issues as 
participation in recreational activities, familiarity with weather and 
climate effects and adaptation methods, sense of place, and opinions on 
shoreline treatment options. No PII will be collected. The final 
collection will support the development of a CSMP for New Hampshire as 
well as provide information to help inform local coastal zone 
management and planning.
    Upon analysis of the pre-test data and guidance from experts in 
survey methodology, the following changes were made to enhance 
understanding, response rate, and to minimize respondent burden:
     Question 4: ``suffered damage'' has been replaced with 
``been damaged'' to avoid potential bias an increase data quality.
     Questions 7a/8a: ``coastal flooding'' has been replaced 
with ``flooding'' to not exclude riverine flooding.
     Questions 7a/8a, 7b/8b: ``flooding damage'' and 
``shoreline erosion damage'' were replaced with ``damage from 
flooding'' and ``damage from shoreline erosion'' to improve 
understanding.
     Questions 14h and 14i were removed based on pre-test 
results to reduce burden without decreasing data quality.
     Questions 16-21 originally asked respondents to indicate 
their preference to six unique policy options, but now respondents are 
asked to compare three sets of unique policy options. Pre-test results 
suggested that respondents would prefer to compare policies rather than 
rate them individually and comparing three sets of policy options 
should reduce burden while increasing data quality.
     Question 22b: This question is now asked after each policy 
comparison instead of once to improve data quality.
     Question 22f: ``a public vote or referendum'' was replaced 
with ``being considered by the New Hampshire legislature'' to convey 
the same information, but using region-specific terminology, which 
should increase data quality.
     Question 22: An additional statement was added to capture 
potentially invalid responses due to ``scenario rejection,'' which 
should increase data quality.
     Question 23: The question and response option phrasings 
have been updated to reflect the modified choice experiment.
     Question 30: The year has been updated from 2019 to 2020 
when asking about the previous year's household income.
     A question has been added to ask how long the respondent 
has been a resident of their current state. Respondents who have 
recently moved within their state may have different opinions than 
those who have recently moved from out-of-state, so this additional 
question should increase data quality.

II. Method of Collection

    The data collection will take place over a five- to nine-month 
period and will be comprised of a questionnaire to be completed by the 
respondent. The data will be collected via a combination of mail and 
internet survey instrument.

III. Data

    OMB Control Number: 0648-0788.
    Form Number(s): None.
    Type of Review: Regular submission (revision of an existing 
information collection).
    Affected Public: Individuals or households.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 6,000.
    Estimated Time per Response: 20 minutes.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 2,000.
    Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $0.
    Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.
    Legal Authority: Digital Coast Act, Coastal Zone Management Act.

IV. Request for Comments

    We are soliciting public comments to permit the Department/Bureau 
to: (a) Evaluate whether the proposed information collection is 
necessary for the proper functions of the Department, including whether 
the information will have practical utility; (b) Evaluate the accuracy 
of our estimate of the time and cost burden for this proposed 
collection, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions 
used; (c) Evaluate ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of 
the information to be collected; and (d) Minimize the reporting burden 
on those who are to respond, including the use of automated collection 
techniques or other forms of information technology.
    Comments that you submit in response to this notice are a matter of 
public record. We will include or summarize each comment in our request 
to OMB to approve this ICR. Before including your address, phone 
number, email address, or other personal identifying information in 
your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment--including 
your personal identifying information--may be made publicly available 
at any time. While you may ask us in your comment to withhold your 
personal identifying information from public review, we

[[Page 22036]]

cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

Sheleen Dumas,
Department PRA Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief Information 
Officer, Commerce Department.
[FR Doc. 2021-08650 Filed 4-23-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-JE-P