There is such a thing as the "Clean Air Act", but the Department of Interior does not respect that law. The Department of Interior has instead, under the direction of Libertarian ideologue Lynn Scarlett, come up with a new idea for providing clean air within National Parks and designated Wilderness areas.

 

Today, with increasing frequency, if you want to view the sunset , you need to pay.

 

How much more would you be willing to pay to have a clear view of the sun as it was setting over your favorite park or Wilderness? That is the subject of the appended announcement from today's Federal Register.

Scott

--- begin quoted ----

[Page 45066-45067]

From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service

30-Day Notice of Submission to the Office of Management and 

Budget; Opportunity for Public Comment

AGENCY: Department of the Interior, National Park Service.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: Under provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 and 5 

CFR Part 1320, Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements, the National 

Park Service (NPS) invites public comments on a proposed new collection 

of information (OMB
1024-XXXX).

DATES: Public comments on this Information Collection Request (ICR) 

will be accepted on or before September 10, 2007.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments directly to the Desk Officer for the 

Department of the Interior (OMB
1024-XXXX), Office of

Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, by fax at 202/395-6566, or by 

electronic mail at 
 This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
 . Please also send a copy of 

your comments to Susan Johnson, Air Resources Division, NPS, 12795 W. 

Alameda Parkway, P.O. Box 25287, Denver, Colorado 80225; or 

electronically at 
 This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
 .

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Johnson, Air Resources Division, 

NPS, 12795 W. Alameda Parkway, P.O. Box 25287, Denver, Colorado 80225; 

or via phone at 303/987-6694; or via fax at 303/969-2822; or via e-mail 

address at 
 This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
 . You are entitled to a copy of the 

entire ICR package free-of-charge.

The NPS published a 60-Day Notice to solicit public comments on 

this ICR in the Federal Register on October 10, 2006 (Vol. 71, No. 195, 

Pages 59521-59522). The comment period closed on December 11, 2006. The 

NPS received one comment as a result of the publication of this 60-Day 

Federal Register Notice.

Comment: The commenter questioned why the visibility study was 

necessary. The commenter noted that regulations that protect air 

quality are already in place, but are not stringent enough or 

inadequately enforced. The commenter also added that the most important 

air quality-related issue is human health, particularly the health of 

children.

Response: Regulations to protect and improve air quality are 

currently in place, and new regulations may be proposed in the future. 

Periodic economic information is necessary to determine whether these 

regulations are efficient. Visibility is a valued component of air 

quality, but current information is outdated, and lacks the benefit of 

recent advances in measuring such values. The information proposed in 

this collection will assist regulators in making better-informed air 

policy decisions. Human health related issues are outside the purview 

of this proposed effort, but are well recognized as the predominant 

economic benefit of improved air quality.



SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Title: Visibility Valuation in National Parks and Wilderness Areas: 

Pre-Test and Pilot Test.

Bureau Form Number(s): None.

OMB Number: To be requested.

Expiration Date: To be requested.

Type of Request: New Collection.

Description of Need: The Clean Air Act includes provisions designed 

to maintain and enhance visibility at national parks and wilderness 

areas (Sections 169A, 169B, and 110(a)(2)(j)). The NPS is directed by 

its Organic Act to ``conserve the scenery * * * unimpaired for the 

enjoyment of future generations'' (16 U.S.C. 1) and the Clean Air Act 

charges the NPS with an ``affirmative responsibility to protect air 

quality related values (including visibility)'' (42 U.S.C. 

7475(d)(2)(B)). Therefore, the NPS believes it is imperative that the 

value of visibility changes is adequately represented in cost-benefit 

analyses related to State and Federal efforts that may affect 

visibility (including the Regional Haze Rule, 40 CFR Part 51). Although 

several studies were conducted to estimate visibility benefits in the 

1970s and 1980s, methodologies for estimating the benefits of 

improvements in environmental goods have advanced signifcantly since 

that time. Furthermore, baseline visibility conditions in national 

parks and wilderness areas have changed significantly over the last few 

decades. As a result, updated estimates of benefits are required.

Current evaluation of Federal and state air quality legislation or 

regulations, as well as regional plans or policies that impact NPS-

managed areas, is based on virility valuation information in Chestnut 

and Rowe, 1990 (e.g., see EPA, 2005). The vintage of this study aside, 

several limitations have been identified by regulators and stakeholders 

alike, including its limited sample frame (EPA, 2005; Leggett et al., 

2004). Thus, the NPS seeks current visibility valuation information 

that will permit accurate evaluation of programs and policies affecting 

visibility in NPS-managed areas.

The NPS plans to conduct a nationwide stated preference survey to 

estimate the value of visibility changes in national parks and 

wilderness areas. Stated-preference surveys use carefully designed 

questions to elicit respondents' willingness to pay for improvements in 

environmental quality. A general population stated-preference survey is 

required in this case, as many U.S. citizens may be willing to pay to 

improve visibility at national parks and wilderness areas, even if they 

do not use these areas. Stated-preference surveys are the only 

methodology available to estimate these non-use values. But to ensure 

that the nationwide survey is unbiased and readily understood by 

respondents, and that the likely effect of non-response on benefit 

estimates is known, the pre-test and pilot test must first be 

conducted.

The pre-testing will be done through focus groups, which will be 

used to develop and refine a survey instrument for the pilot study. 

Twelve focus groups will be conducted, with approximately 10 

participants in each group (120 in total). Thus, a sufficient number of 

responses will be gathered to evaluate the information presentation, 

reliability, internal consistency, response variability, and other 

properties of the draft survey. Results will be used to make 

improvements to the survey instrument. NPS will proceed iteratively, 

modifying the draft survey instrument after each focus group to ensure 

that the wording of the questions is clear and unbiased, and 

effectively address the relevant issues.

The pilot study will be designed to account for the potential 

impact of mail survey non-response on benefit estimates. The pilot 

study will involve a split-sample comparison between a mail and in-

person survey. Respondents will be asked to complete the survey 

instrument developed during the pre-testing stage. The results will 

ultimately be used to adjust the benefit estimates obtained in the 

nationwide survey for potential non-response bias. The final content of 

the pilot survey instrument will depend on the pre-testing results. At 

a minimum, the survey will describe the characteristics of various 

visibility improvement programs and ask respondents to select a 

preferred program. The survey will also include socio-demographic 

questions and questions designed to evaluate the respondents' 

motivation in selecting a preferred program. Surveys will be conducted 

with approximately 800 individuals.

For this pilot study, 16 neighborhoods will be selected in two 

metropolitan areas (Phoenix, AZ and Syracuse, NY). Each neighborhood 

sample will be split into two groups, with 50 households assigned to a 

mail survey group and 50 households assigned to an in-person survey 

group. The in-person survey will be conducted in a manner that 

minimizes the differences between the two survey modes.

Comments are invited on: (1) The practical utility of the 

information being gathered; (2) the accuracy of the burden hour 

estimate; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the 

information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden to 

respondents, including use of automated information collection 

techniques or other forms of information technology. Before including 

your address, phone number, e-mail 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.

Frequency of collection: Once.

Description of Respondents: Residents of Atlanta, GA, Chicago, IL, 

Sacramento, CA (focus groups) and Phoenix, AZ and Syracuse, NY 

(response rate pilot study).

Estimated average number or respondents: Focus groups: 1,200 in 

recruitment and 120 in pre-testing activities. Pilot study: 480 mail 

refusals, 320 in-person refusals, and 800 respondents.

Estimated average number of responses: 920 (120 responses for focus 

groups; 800 responses for pilot study).

Estimated average time burden per respondent: 2.5 hours for focus 

group respondents, 20 minutes for pilot survey respondents.

Frequency of response: 1 time per respondent.

Estimated total annual reporting burden: 567 hours.



Dated: July 12, 2007.

Leonard E. Stowe,

NPS, Information Collection Clearance Officer.

[FR Doc. 07-3916 Filed 8-9-07; 8:45 am]
 

Comments (0) >>