80 FR 62567 - Information Collection: Atlantic Offshore Wind Energy Development-Public Attitudes, Values, and Implications for Tourism and Recreation; Submitted for OMB Review; Comment Request
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 200 (October 16, 2015)
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management
Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 200 (October 16, 2015)
| Page Range | 62567-62569 | |
| FR Document | 2015-25971 |
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 200 (Friday, October 16, 2015)] [Notices] [Pages 62567-62569] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2015-25971] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Ocean Energy Management [OMB Number 1010--New; MMAA104000] Information Collection: Atlantic Offshore Wind Energy Development--Public Attitudes, Values, and Implications for Tourism and Recreation; Submitted for OMB Review; Comment Request ACTION: 30-day notice. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: To comply with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) is notifying the public that we have submitted an information collection request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval. The ICR concerns a new survey on the potential impacts of Atlantic offshore wind energy development on coastal tourism and recreation. This notice provides the public a second opportunity to comment on the paperwork burden of this collection. DATES: Submit written comments by November 16, 2015. ADDRESSES: Submit comments on this ICR to the Desk Officer for the Department of the Interior at OMB-OIRA at (202) 395-5806 (fax) or OIRA_submission@omb.eop.gov (email). Please provide a copy of your comments to the BOEM Information Collection Clearance Officer, Kye Mason, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, 45600 Woodland Road, Sterling, Virginia 20166 (mail) or kye.mason@boem.gov (email). Please reference ICR 1010-New in your comment and include your name and return address. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kye Mason, Office of Policy, Regulations, and Analysis at kye.mason@boem.gov (email) or (703) 787- 1025 (phone). You may review the ICR online at http://www.reginfo.gov. Follow the instructions to review Department of the Interior collections under review by OMB. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OMB Control Number: 1010--New. Title: Atlantic Offshore Wind Energy Development: Public Attitudes, Values, [[Page 62568]] and Implications for Tourism and Recreation. Abstract: Under the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1331-1356), BOEM is responsible for conducting OCS lease sales and for monitoring and mitigating adverse impacts that might be associated with offshore energy development. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 13201 et seq.) authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to issue leases, easements, and rights-of-way for offshore renewable energy activities in Federal waters, such as offshore wind power development. In fulfilling these responsibilities, BOEM must take into consideration the impacts of OCS activities on recreational resources. While we have seen significant interest in offshore wind power development in recent years, the absence of baseline data for specific areas along the Atlantic coast and the absence of a broader regional study on tourism and wind power have made it difficult to identify and analyze the potential impacts of offshore wind development on coastal tourism and recreation. Additional information on these potential impacts will contribute to better planning and decision making for BOEM and other stakeholders, including other Federal agencies and State and local governments. Under a cooperative agreement awarded by the Department of the Interior, the University of Delaware will conduct a survey to assess the impact of offshore wind power projects on coastal recreation and tourism from Massachusetts to South Carolina. The survey will gauge public perceptions of offshore wind energy projects and how development could impact future recreation and visitation choices. BOEM will use this information, along with other economic and environmental information, in our offshore wind decision making process and marine spatial planning efforts. States and coastal communities will use the information for local coastal planning efforts. The data collection will be done by an Internet-based survey. We decided to use an internet-based approach in part to improve the images respondents are shown. The internet also allows us to easily accommodate different skip patterns and variation in wind projects shown to respondents. Frequency: One time. Description of Respondents: Individuals. Total Annual Burden Hours ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Average completion Activity Annual number time per Total annual of responses person burden hours (minutes) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- General Population Sample ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Non-respondents & Dropouts...................................... 88 2 3 Respondents..................................................... 500 15 125 ----------------------------------------------- Total....................................................... 588 17 128 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Beachgoer-Only Sample ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Non-respondents & Dropouts...................................... 3,778 3 189 Respondents..................................................... 1,600 15 400 ----------------------------------------------- Total....................................................... 5,378 18 589 ----------------------------------------------- Overall Total........................................... 5,966 .............. 717 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Estimated Reporting and Recordkeeping Non-hour Cost Burden: We have not identified any non-hour cost burdens for this collection. Public Disclosure Statement: The PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.) provides that an agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. Until OMB approves a collection of information, you are not obligated to respond. Comments: We invite comments concerning this information collection on:Whether or not the collection of information is necessary, including whether or not the information will have practical utility; The accuracy of our burden estimates; Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and Ways to minimize the burden on respondents. To comply with the public consultation process, on July 1, 2014, BOEM published a Federal Register notice (79 FR 37348) announcing that we would submit this ICR to OMB for approval. This notice provided the required 60-day comment period. We received comments from one person. Comment: The location of residence (primary or secondary) should be given as a zip code. The zip code then determines the city, State, and distance to beach. There is no need for the respondent to guess what the distance is. Response: The distance question has been deleted. Comment: Offshore wind farms is a mature technology. A simple google image search shows a variety of real photos of wind farms off Denmark and the UK. Consider the use of real pictures in place of simulated offshore wind turbines. Response: We are particularly interested in the impact on beach use and tourism of wind projects at different distances offshore. It is not feasible to find pictures of existing projects at different distances while keeping other features constant (e.g., number of turbines, size of turbines, beach appearance, production quality for presentation on the Internet, etc.). The simulations allow us to ``move wind projects'' to different distances holding all other features constant. We also are interested in specific turbine sizes (larger than most of the existing ones) and turbine numbers (also larger than [[Page 62569]] most existing projects). We also want to use beaches on the Atlantic coast for our shots. The coastlines in Europe where turbines exist are very different from the coastline in the United States. Comment: The geology of the Atlantic OCS indicates it is a natural gas province. For example in the 1970s, there was a natural gas discovery off the coast of Atlantic City, New Jersey. Natural gas production accidents do not yield oil and tar balls. A better hypothetical would be beach closures from hurricanes and nor'easters. The respondents should be familiar with these kinds of events. Response: These hypothetical beach closure questions have been dropped altogether. Comment: There is a question asking for personal annual income from working. There are many who have considerable income without working. Is it the intent not to capture this information? They have the time and the resources to be frequent ocean beach users. Response: The income question has been changed to read: ``Which category is closest to your personal annual income before taxes?'' Comment: The stratum sample sizes for the survey gives the appearance of being arbitrary. Consider that New Jersey & Delaware has a stratum of population of 8.8 million with a sample size of 200 participants. That works out to 22.73 participants per million. Compare to Pennsylvania 10.4 million population with 150 participants which is 14.42 participants per million. So citizens of Delaware are about 50% more likely to be selected as compared to Pennsylvania citizens. For full disclosure the University of Delaware is conducting the survey and I am a resident of Pennsylvania who is also a property owner in New Jersey. Further someone in Memphis, TN, is part of the survey universe, however someone living in Vermont is excluded. I have family members who live in Vermont and frequently visit the Jersey Shore. Response: Based on this comment and comments from others we have redesigned the sampling strategy to include two separate samples: A General Population Sample and an Oversample Sample. The former is a random draw from all individuals in the 20 states in our region (now including Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine, and Georgia) and the latter is a random draw from all beachgoers in the same states. Since both of these samples are randomly drawn, the representation is proportional to state populations. Comment: A good property of selected stratum is to have homogeneity within the stratum (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratified_sampling). The use of New York state as a stratum fails this principal. There is Long Island which is the beach community. New York City a major city with near by ocean beaches. Up state New York has ocean beaches which are more distant. Does not make sense to put Hampton's and Buffalo in the same stratum! Response: See comment to previous question. We no longer stratify by state. Comment: The total sample size for the participants of 1,400 is reasonable for obtaining summary insights. The data collection includes attributes, such as distance to the beach, education, number of children, employment status and income. If this survey has a goal of obtaining insights at this kind of granular level then the sample size will need to be adjusted to meet these goals. Response: Our budget limits us to the sample size we are using. Comment: The statistical survey design should follow Dillman's Tailored Design Method (http://www.amazon.com/Internet-Phone-Mail-Mixed-Mode-Surveys/dp/1118456149/ref=dp_ob_title_bk). This is the approach that is being used by BOEM in Alaska in the Arctic Communities Survey. Response: Our survey follows Dillman's method fairly closely. It may depart in a few instances based on our own judgment calls, but it is largely based on Dillman. Comment: The commenter made the following recommendations: Establish clear goals for the information collection, which then drives the design. Use Dillman's Tailored Design Method. Create stratums that are approximately homogeneous. Suggested stratums: Near Ocean Beaches (SC coast, Outer Banks, Tidewater VA, Delmarva, Jersey shore, Long Island, Rhode Island, Cape Cod), Metro Areas (Washington, Baltimore, Philadelphia, New York City, Boston metro areas), Inland (Other parts of SC, NC, VA, MD, Central PA, NJ, CT, MA), Distant Areas (OH, WV, TN, KY, Western PA, Upstate NY, VT, NH). Use zip codes for location of respondents. Publish the raw data so it can be independently analyzed. Response: We addressed most of the recommendations in our responses. As noted, our survey was designed with a specific economic model in mind--a travel cost model; we use Dillman's approach fairly closely, but not always; we no longer stratify by geography; and we will use zip codes for location of the respondents. In addition, we plan to publish the raw data. Public Availability of Comments: 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 can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. Dated: October 1, 2015. Deanna Meyer-Pietruszka, Chief, Office of Policy, Regulations, and Analysis. [FR Doc. 2015-25971 Filed 10-15-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-MR-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 200 / Friday, October 16, 2015 / Notices 62567
In 1947–1951, human remains known individuals were identified. No and the United Keetoowah Band of
representing, at minimum, one associated funerary objects are present. Cherokee Indians in Oklahoma that this
individual were removed from the Cultural affiliation of the human notice has been published.
Chewapa site in Lee County, MS, by an remains described above could not be Dated: August 25, 2015.
unknown individual who gave the determined due to uncertain burial Melanie O’Brien,
remains to the WPA survey in the area. provenience, lack of culturally affiliated
Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
The site is dated to the Miller III/Late historic artifacts, and/or the antiquity of
[FR Doc. 2015–26331 Filed 10–15–15; 8:45 am]
Woodland period (circa A.D. 500–1200). the remains.
BILLING CODE 4312–50–P
No known individuals were identified. Determinations Made by Natchez Trace
No associated funerary objects are Parkway
present. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
In 1948, human remains representing, Officials of Natchez Trace Parkway
at minimum, one individual were have determined that: Bureau of Ocean Energy Management
removed from Headquarters Mound in • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the
Lee County, MS, during excavation and human remains described in this notice [OMB Number 1010—New; MMAA104000]
survey. The site dates to the Late are Native American based on
archeological context. Information Collection: Atlantic
Woodland period (circa A.D. 500–1000).
No known individuals were identified. • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the Offshore Wind Energy Development—
human remains described in this notice Public Attitudes, Values, and
No associated funerary objects are Implications for Tourism and
present. represent the physical remains of 60
individuals of Native American Recreation; Submitted for OMB
In 1948, human remains representing, Review; Comment Request
at minimum, three individuals were ancestry.
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(A),
removed from Old Rodgers Place ACTION: 30-day notice.
the 365 objects described in this notice
Number One in Lee County, MS, during
are reasonably believed to have been SUMMARY: To comply with the
a WPA survey. The site is prehistoric
placed with or near individual human Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
Native American, but an exact date is
remains at the time of death or later as (PRA), the Bureau of Ocean Energy
unknown. No known individuals were
part of the death rite or ceremony. The Management (BOEM) is notifying the
identified. No associated funerary
National Park Service intends to convey public that we have submitted an
objects are present.
the associated funerary objects to the information collection request (ICR) to
In 1949, human remains representing,
tribes pursuant to 16 U.S.C. 18f–2. the Office of Management and Budget
at minimum, one individual, were • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), a
removed from the Coonewah Creek site (OMB) for review and approval. The ICR
relationship of shared group identity concerns a new survey on the potential
in Lee County, MS, during a site survey. cannot be reasonably traced between the
The site dates to the Miller III/Late impacts of Atlantic offshore wind
Native American human remains and energy development on coastal tourism
Woodland Period (circa A.D. 500–1200). associated funerary objects and any
No known individuals were identified. and recreation. This notice provides the
present-day Indian tribe. public a second opportunity to
No associated funerary objects are • Treaties, Acts of Congress, or
present. comment on the paperwork burden of
Executive Orders, indicate that the land this collection.
In 1965, human remains representing, from which the Native American human
at minimum, three individuals were DATES: Submit written comments by
remains and associated funerary objects November 16, 2015.
removed from Bear Creek Temple were removed is the aboriginal land of
Mound in Tishomingo County, MS, ADDRESSES: Submit comments on this
The Chickasaw Nation.
during archeological investigations. The ICR to the Desk Officer for the
• Pursuant to 43 CFR 10.11(c)(1), the
site dates to the Late Mississippian Department of the Interior at OMB–
disposition of the human remains and
period (circa A.D. 1400–1600). No OIRA at (202) 395–5806 (fax) or OIRA_
associated funerary objects may be to
known individuals were identified. The submission@omb.eop.gov (email). Please
The Chickasaw Nation.
three associated funerary objects are one provide a copy of your comments to the
untyped vessel fragment and two deer Additional Requestors and Disposition BOEM Information Collection Clearance
bones. Representatives of any Indian tribe or Officer, Kye Mason, Bureau of Ocean
In 1972, human remains representing, Native Hawaiian organization not Energy Management, 45600 Woodland
at minimum, six individuals were identified in this notice that wish to Road, Sterling, Virginia 20166 (mail) or
removed from Pharr Mounds in Prentiss request transfer of control of these kye.mason@boem.gov (email). Please
County, MS, during excavations of the human remains and associated funerary reference ICR 1010–New in your
village area and four mounds. The site objects should submit a written request comment and include your name and
dates to the Miller I–II phases of the with information in support of the return address.
Middle Woodland period (circa A.D. 0– request to Mary Risser, Superintendent, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kye
500). No known individuals were Natchez Trace Parkway, 2680 Natchez Mason, Office of Policy, Regulations,
identified. The 14 associated funerary Trace Parkway, Tupelo, MS 38804– and Analysis at kye.mason@boem.gov
objects are 7 Saltillo Fabric vessel 9715, telephone (662) 680–4005, email (email) or (703) 787–1025 (phone). You
fragments, 6 Baldwin Plain vessel mary_risser@nps.gov, by November 16, may review the ICR online at http://
fragments, and 1 untyped vessel 2015. After that date, if no additional www.reginfo.gov. Follow the
srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
fragment. requestors have come forward, transfer instructions to review Department of the
In 1978, human remains representing, of control of the human remains and Interior collections under review by
at minimum, two individuals were associated funerary objects to The OMB.
removed from Pharr Mounds in Prentiss Chickasaw Nation may proceed. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
County, MS. The remains were removed Natchez Trace Parkway is responsible OMB Control Number: 1010—New.
during excavations to investigate the for notifying the Alabama-Coushatta Title: Atlantic Offshore Wind Energy
impact of construction near the site. No Tribe of Texas, The Chickasaw Nation, Development: Public Attitudes, Values,
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:54 Oct 15, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\16OCN1.SGM 16OCN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_62767/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 200 / Friday, October 16, 2015 / Notices 62569
most existing projects). We also want to the stratum (http://en.wikipedia.org/ respondents. In addition, we plan to
use beaches on the Atlantic coast for our wiki/Stratified_sampling). The use of publish the raw data.
shots. The coastlines in Europe where New York state as a stratum fails this Public Availability of Comments:
turbines exist are very different from the principal. There is Long Island which is Before including your address, phone
coastline in the United States. the beach community. New York City a number, email address, or other
Comment: The geology of the Atlantic major city with near by ocean beaches. personal identifying information in your
OCS indicates it is a natural gas Up state New York has ocean beaches comment, you should be aware that
province. For example in the 1970s, which are more distant. Does not make your entire comment—including your
there was a natural gas discovery off the sense to put Hampton’s and Buffalo in personal identifying information—may
coast of Atlantic City, New Jersey. the same stratum! be made publicly available at any time.
Natural gas production accidents do not Response: See comment to previous While you can ask us in your comment
yield oil and tar balls. A better question. We no longer stratify by state. to withhold your personal identifying
hypothetical would be beach closures Comment: The total sample size for information from public review, we
from hurricanes and nor’easters. The the participants of 1,400 is reasonable cannot guarantee that we will be able to
respondents should be familiar with for obtaining summary insights. The do so.
these kinds of events. data collection includes attributes, such Dated: October 1, 2015.
Response: These hypothetical beach as distance to the beach, education,
closure questions have been dropped Deanna Meyer-Pietruszka,
number of children, employment status Chief, Office of Policy, Regulations, and
altogether. and income. If this survey has a goal of
Comment: There is a question asking Analysis.
obtaining insights at this kind of [FR Doc. 2015–25971 Filed 10–15–15; 8:45 am]
for personal annual income from granular level then the sample size will
working. There are many who have BILLING CODE 4310–MR–P
need to be adjusted to meet these goals.
considerable income without working.
Response: Our budget limits us to the
Is it the intent not to capture this
sample size we are using.
information? They have the time and INTERNATIONAL TRADE
Comment: The statistical survey
the resources to be frequent ocean beach COMMISSION
design should follow Dillman’s Tailored
users.
Response: The income question has Design Method (http:// [Investigation No. 337–TA–956]
been changed to read: ‘‘Which category www.amazon.com/Internet-Phone-Mail-
Mixed-Mode-Surveys/dp/1118456149/ Certain Recombinant Factor VIII
is closest to your personal annual Products; Commission Determination
income before taxes?’’ ref=dp_ob_title_bk). This is the
approach that is being used by BOEM in Not To Review an Initial Determination
Comment: The stratum sample sizes Granting an Unopposed Motion To
for the survey gives the appearance of Alaska in the Arctic Communities
Survey. Amend the Complaint and Notice of
being arbitrary. Consider that New Investigation
Jersey & Delaware has a stratum of Response: Our survey follows
population of 8.8 million with a sample Dillman’s method fairly closely. It may AGENCY: U.S. International Trade
size of 200 participants. That works out depart in a few instances based on our Commission.
to 22.73 participants per million. own judgment calls, but it is largely ACTION: Notice.
Compare to Pennsylvania 10.4 million based on Dillman.
population with 150 participants which Comment: The commenter made the SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that
is 14.42 participants per million. So following recommendations: the U.S. International Trade
citizens of Delaware are about 50% • Establish clear goals for the Commission has determined not to
more likely to be selected as compared information collection, which then review an initial determination (‘‘ID’’)
to Pennsylvania citizens. For full drives the design. (Order No. 10) granting an unopposed
disclosure the University of Delaware is • Use Dillman’s Tailored Design motion to add as complainants Baxalta,
conducting the survey and I am a Method. Inc. of Deerfield, Illinois; Baxalta US
resident of Pennsylvania who is also a • Create stratums that are Inc. of Deerfield, Illinois; and Baxalta
property owner in New Jersey. Further approximately homogeneous. Suggested GmbH of Glattpark, Switzerland.
someone in Memphis, TN, is part of the stratums: Near Ocean Beaches (SC coast, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
survey universe, however someone Outer Banks, Tidewater VA, Delmarva, Lucy Grace D. Noyola, Office of the
living in Vermont is excluded. I have Jersey shore, Long Island, Rhode Island, General Counsel, U.S. International
family members who live in Vermont Cape Cod), Metro Areas (Washington, Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW.,
and frequently visit the Jersey Shore. Baltimore, Philadelphia, New York City, Washington, DC 20436, telephone 202–
Response: Based on this comment and Boston metro areas), Inland (Other parts 205–3438. Copies of non-confidential
comments from others we have of SC, NC, VA, MD, Central PA, NJ, CT, documents filed in connection with this
redesigned the sampling strategy to MA), Distant Areas (OH, WV, TN, KY, investigation are or will be available for
include two separate samples: A Western PA, Upstate NY, VT, NH). inspection during official business
General Population Sample and an • Use zip codes for location of hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the
Oversample Sample. The former is a respondents. Office of the Secretary, U.S.
random draw from all individuals in the • Publish the raw data so it can be International Trade Commission, 500 E
20 states in our region (now including independently analyzed. Street SW., Washington, DC 20436,
Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine, and Response: We addressed most of the telephone 202–205–2000. General
srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Georgia) and the latter is a random draw recommendations in our responses. As information concerning the Commission
from all beachgoers in the same states. noted, our survey was designed with a may also be obtained by accessing its
Since both of these samples are specific economic model in mind—a Internet server (http://www.usitc.gov).
randomly drawn, the representation is travel cost model; we use Dillman’s The public record for this investigation
proportional to state populations. approach fairly closely, but not always; may be viewed on the Commission’s
Comment: A good property of selected we no longer stratify by geography; and electronic docket (EDIS) at http://
stratum is to have homogeneity within we will use zip codes for location of the edis.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:54 Oct 15, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\16OCN1.SGM 16OCN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_62767/page/3.svg)
Document Created: 2015-12-14 15:23:50
Document Modified: 2015-12-14 15:23:50
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Notices | |
| Action | 30-day notice. | |
| Dates | Submit written comments by November 16, 2015. | |
| Contact | Kye Mason, Office of Policy, Regulations, and Analysis at [email protected] (email) or (703) 787- 1025 (phone). You may review the ICR online at http://www.reginfo.gov. Follow the instructions to review Department of the Interior collections under review by OMB. | |
| FR Citation | 80 FR 62567 |
2024 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR