The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted a request to renew its information collection activities involving focus groups for economics projects. This submission, detailed in the Federal Register on October 29, 2025, seeks approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act. The renewal would allow the EPA to continue using focus groups and protocol interviews to develop and refine surveys related to environmental and economic issues. This process is significant because it supports the agency's efforts to gather public input on policies affecting areas such as water quality and health risks, ensuring that economic analyses are grounded in real-world perspectives. The current approval expires on October 31, 2025, and the agency is providing a 30-day window for additional public comments following a prior 60-day period.
Background and Purpose
The EPA's information collection request (ICR), identified as EPA ICR Number 2205.26 and OMB Control Number 2090-0028, focuses on the use of focus groups and protocol interviews in economics-related projects. These tools are essential during the survey development phase, enabling researchers to explore public attitudes, beliefs, motivations, and feelings about specific issues. According to the Federal Register notice, the information gathered helps improve draft survey instruments and ultimately enhances the agency's understanding of the benefits and costs associated with environmental actions.
This ICR renewal is governed by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, which requires federal agencies to obtain OMB approval for any collection of information from the public to minimize unnecessary burden. The EPA has used this authority in the past for projects involving topics like drinking water quality, health risk reductions, and coastal adaptation and restoration. The notice emphasizes that participation in these focus groups is voluntary and that participant identities will remain confidential, addressing potential concerns about privacy under statutes that restrict disclosure of certain information.
Key Details of the Renewal Request
The proposed renewal covers a three-year period, during which the EPA anticipates conducting focus groups for various economics projects. The agency estimates engaging 432 respondents total, with an annual burden of 288 hours. This represents a decrease of 1,314 hours from the previously approved ICR, attributed to a reduced need for such activities compared to past years. The estimated annual cost is $100,973, including $80,000 for capitalized or operation and maintenance expenses.
Supporting documents in the public docket, accessible via regulations.gov under Docket ID EPA-HQ-OA-2025-0172, provide further details on the collection methods. As stated in the notice, 'Focus groups are an important part of any survey development process, allowing researchers to directly gauge what specific issues are important to the public and providing a means for explicitly testing draft survey materials.' This approach ensures that surveys are not only accurate but also relevant to public concerns. The respondents are individuals, and responses are expected once, with no required forms.
Public Comment Process and Timeline
Public engagement is a core component of this renewal. The EPA initially requested comments through a Federal Register notice on August 28, 2025, opening a 60-day period that garnered input on the proposed activities. The current notice extends this by an additional 30 days, with comments due by November 28, 2025. Submissions can be made via regulations.gov or by mail to the EPA Docket Center.
The notice outlines that all comments will be included in the public docket without alteration, except for redactions of profanity, threats, confidential business information, or statutorily restricted data. This transparency aligns with EPA policy and encourages informed feedback. Comments should also be directed to OMB through reginfo.gov to influence the final approval process.
Legal and Policy Context
This ICR operates within the framework of the Paperwork Reduction Act, which aims to reduce paperwork burdens on the public while ensuring agencies collect necessary information. The act prohibits agencies from conducting or sponsoring information collections without a valid OMB control number, as noted in the Federal Register entry: 'An agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.'
Relevant precedents include prior renewals of similar ICRs by the EPA, which have supported economic analyses for regulatory impact assessments. For instance, focus groups have informed cost-benefit analyses under executive orders requiring agencies to evaluate the economic effects of regulations. While not directly tied to specific court cases, this process indirectly supports compliance with judicial standards for evidence-based rulemaking, such as those seen in cases challenging EPA regulations on grounds of inadequate economic justification.
Political forces include ongoing debates over regulatory burdens and environmental protections. Proponents view these focus groups as vital for incorporating diverse perspectives into policy development, potentially leading to more effective regulations. Critics might argue that even voluntary collections impose indirect costs or raise privacy issues, though the notice's emphasis on confidentiality mitigates such concerns. The reduction in estimated burden could reflect efficiency improvements or shifting agency priorities amid broader discussions on federal paperwork reduction.
Implications and Perspectives
In the short term, approval of this ICR would enable the EPA to proceed with survey development without interruption, supporting upcoming projects on environmental economics. Long-term implications include enhanced data quality for policy decisions, potentially influencing regulations on water quality or climate adaptation. Different stakeholders offer varied views: environmental advocates may support it for promoting informed policies, while industry groups could scrutinize it for any added regulatory insights that might affect compliance costs. Academics and policymakers often see value in such tools for bridging gaps between technical analyses and public sentiment.
The process highlights the balance between gathering essential data and minimizing public burden, a tension inherent in federal information collections.
The EPA's renewal request for focus groups in economics projects underscores the agency's commitment to evidence-based policymaking. Key takeaways include the voluntary nature of participation, the focus on survey improvement, and the opportunity for public input. Looking ahead, potential next steps involve OMB review and possible adjustments based on comments. Ongoing debates may center on balancing data needs with burden reduction, while challenges could arise if future projects expand in scope, requiring further ICR modifications. This renewal could set the stage for more robust economic analyses in environmental policy.