Overview
Title
Collection of Information Under Review by Office of Management and Budget; OMB Control Number 1625-0109
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The Coast Guard wants to know what people think about keeping some rules that help them decide when and how drawbridges open, and they want to make sure it doesn’t take up too much of anyone's time.
Summary AI
The U.S. Coast Guard is asking for public comments on extending the approval of information collection related to Drawbridge Operation Regulations. The Coast Guard collects information from bridge owners to change the operating schedules of drawbridges over U.S. navigable waters, as per 33 U.S.C. 499. They estimate the process involves an annual burden of 1,672 hours. Comments on this proposal can be submitted online until February 11, 2021, via the Federal eRulemaking Portal or other specified channels.
Abstract
In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 the U.S. Coast Guard is forwarding an Information Collection Request (ICR), abstracted below, to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), requesting an extension of its approval for the following collection of information: 1625-0109, Drawbridge Operation Regulations; without change. Our ICR describes the information we seek to collect from the public. Review and comments by OIRA ensure we only impose paperwork burdens commensurate with our performance of duties.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The document from the U.S. Coast Guard, as presented in the Federal Register, focuses on seeking public comments regarding an ongoing information collection request. This request pertains specifically to the Drawbridge Operation Regulations and is part of compliance efforts with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
General Summary
The U.S. Coast Guard is responsible for regulating the operation schedules of drawbridges across navigable waters in the United States. As part of this regulatory task, they collect information from bridge owners, both public and private, to oversee any proposed changes in the operation of these drawbridges. The document outlines a request to extend the approval of this information collection process without any changes. The estimated annual burden of this process is noted to be 1,672 hours. The public is invited to submit comments online until February 11, 2021.
Significant Issues and Concerns
Several issues arise from this document. Primarily, while the estimated burden of 1,672 hours is presented, the calculation behind this figure is not explained. This lack of transparency can lead to questions about the reasonableness of the estimate and make it challenging for the public to provide informed comments.
Additionally, the broader implications and specific benefits of collecting this information are not sufficiently elaborated. The document states the necessity but could enhance public understanding of regulatory objectives by detailing the practical utility more comprehensively.
The document also references Executive Orders focused on reducing regulation and controlling costs. However, it lacks specifics on how this information collection aligns with these regulatory goals, potentially leaving readers without a sense of whether simplification measures have been considered.
The previous notice period, mentioned to have elicited no public comments, could suggest either a content public or an issue with public engagement. The document does not provide analysis or potential solutions to this apparent lack of response.
Public Impact
For the general public, understanding how this regulation affects them might not be clear-cut. However, the process of collecting information on drawbridge operations indirectly impacts those who rely on these structures for transportation, commerce, and emergency services. Ensuring these bridges operate efficiently and with minimal disruption is in the interest of local communities.
Specific Stakeholder Impact
Bridge owners, both private and public, are the primary stakeholders directly influenced by this information collection. The requirement to provide detailed operational changes necessitates administrative resources. Depending on the complexity involved, this process could be seen as burdensome. Conversely, it also ensures that operational changes are systematically evaluated, potentially leading to safer and more efficient infrastructure.
In conclusion, while the Coast Guard's intentions are rooted in operational efficiency and regulatory compliance, the document could benefit from enhanced clarity and transparency around the processes and burdens involved. This would likely engage the public more effectively and provide a clearer picture of how the information collection serves both governmental functions and public interest.
Issues
• The document mentions the estimated burden of the information collection is 1,672 hours a year, but it does not break down how this burden was calculated or what specific tasks contribute to this burden, making it difficult to assess the reasonableness of this estimate.
• The purpose and necessity of collecting the information from bridge owners, while stated, could be elaborated on further to enhance understanding of its practical utility and significance.
• The document mentions Executive Orders 13771 and 13777 regarding reducing regulation and costs, but it does not provide specific information on how this particular information collection aligns with these orders.
• The document references a 60-day notice (85 FR 66572, October 20, 2020) that elicited no comments, which suggests either a lack of public awareness or engagement, or satisfaction with the process. However, no analysis of this lack of response is provided.
• The language is generally clear but could be simplified in some parts. For example, the phrase 'Review and comments by OIRA ensure we only impose paperwork burdens commensurate with our performance of duties' could be simpler.
• There is no indication of any spending directly associated with the collection of information, thus no assessment can be made on potentially wasteful spending or favoritism.