Overview
Title
Collection of Information Under Review by Office of Management and Budget; OMB Control Number 1625-0119
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The Coast Guard wants to hear what people think about their plan to keep asking for information for a program that gives scholarships to families of Coast Guard workers. They are making sure it's not too hard to apply for these scholarships and want to know if the process is easy and fair enough.
Summary AI
The U.S. Coast Guard is seeking public comments on its request to extend the approval for the collection of information related to the Coast Guard Exchange System Scholarship Application. This request is in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The information is used to evaluate and rank scholarship applications for dependents of Coast Guard members and employees. The public can submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal before February 11, 2021, citing the OMB Control Number 1625-0119 and docket number USCG-2020-0664.
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: 1625-0119, Coast Guard Exchange System Scholarship Application; 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 in question is an official notice from the U.S. Coast Guard, which is seeking public comments on its Information Collection Request (ICR). This request pertains specifically to the extension of approval for the Coast Guard Exchange System Scholarship Application, a program designed to evaluate and rank scholarship applications submitted by dependents of Coast Guard members and employees. The notice complies with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, aiming to ensure that the collection of information does not impose unnecessary burdens on the public. Comments can be submitted through a federal portal before the specified deadline of February 11, 2021.
General Summary
The primary focus of the document is to solicit public input on the proposed continuation of the Coast Guard's information collection process, used to award scholarships. The process is undertaken without any alterations from previous years. The document highlights that the information collection is crucial for assessing scholarship applications according to predefined criteria. Those wishing to comment on this procedural extension are encouraged to cite specific docket numbers and follow particular submission protocols.
Significant Issues and Concerns
While the document outlines the process for comment submission, several issues arise upon closer examination. First, there is a noticeable lack of transparency regarding the specific criteria used in evaluating the scholarship applications. This absence can lead to ambiguity, as potential applicants and their families may feel uncertain about what qualifies as a favorable application.
Moreover, the estimated burden of 120 hours per year devoted to this process seems quite low for a major organization like the U.S. Coast Guard. This low estimate may not accurately reflect the real impact on respondents required to complete and submit the scholarship applications.
The call for public comments also lacks clarity on why public input is being sought if no changes are proposed. This could discourage public involvement, as stakeholders might perceive their contributions as unlikely to result in meaningful modifications.
Public and Stakeholder Impact
On a broad scale, the documentation and solicitation for comments affect anyone involved in or connected to the Coast Guard, particularly those eligible to apply for scholarships. The open comment process is intended to allow a level of democratic participation, potentially improving the process based on input from a diverse field of commentators.
However, the lack of detailed information regarding the evaluation criteria may deter participation from potential applicants concerned about the fairness and transparency of the scholarship process. On the other hand, the process benefits stakeholders within the Coast Guard system by signaling a stable, albeit unchanged, method for scholarship allocation, ensuring continuity in funding opportunities.
Conclusion
While the document serves an administrative purpose, it raises concerns that may affect its efficacy. Clearer articulation of evaluation criteria and rationale for public comment might enhance transparency and engagement. Adequate response to these concerns could ensure the scholarship program's continued success while inviting meaningful stakeholder contributions. In doing so, the Coast Guard could more effectively balance procedural efficiency with equitable access to educational opportunities for its dependents.
Issues
• The document does not provide detailed information on the criteria used to evaluate the scholarship applications, which can lead to ambiguity about the fairness and transparency of the award process.
• The estimated hour burden of 120 hours per year seems low for a large organization like the U.S. Coast Guard, potentially underestimating the actual burden on respondents.
• The call for comments does not specify any critical changes proposed or rationale for seeking public input, which may limit public engagement.
• The language regarding the extension of approval 'without change' could be more explicit about why no changes are being proposed despite seeking public comments.
• The document could simplify the process for potential commenters to locate and submit comments regarding the ICR, especially for those not familiar with federal protocols or websites.
• The document references specific documents and instructions (e.g., CSCINST 1780 (series)) without providing sufficient context or access for those outside the Coast Guard, limiting complete understanding by the general public.