Overview
Title
Agency Information Collection Activities; Recreation Survey Questions
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The Bureau of Reclamation wants to ask people visiting their parks some questions to make the parks better, and they are asking everyone what they think about this plan. They're making sure they do it right, but some people are worried about privacy and how much time it will take.
Summary AI
The Bureau of Reclamation, part of the Interior Department, is seeking to renew approval for collecting information from people visiting their recreational areas. This effort aims to gather up-to-date data on visitor use to improve recreation programs. The agency is inviting public comments on this proposed information collection, which involves a survey conducted twice a year across various sites. The feedback collected will help the Bureau to address visitor needs and ensure the recreation facilities meet current demands.
Abstract
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we, the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), are proposing to renew an information collection.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The Bureau of Reclamation, a part of the Interior Department, is aiming to renew the approval for a survey to gather information from visitors to their numerous recreation areas. This survey is part of an ongoing effort to provide relevant and efficient recreation programs that cater to the shifting demographics, needs, and desires of the public visiting these areas. This process is guided by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, which seeks to minimize the paperwork burden on the public. The bureau is inviting public comments about the necessity, utility, clarity, and potential burden of this information collection.
Key Considerations and Concerns
The document outlines the intention and methodology for the proposed survey, which will be conducted twice annually. However, certain aspects might raise considerations. First, despite detailing the burden hours associated with survey completion, it does not account for any potential costs related to the survey's implementation. Evaluating such costs is crucial to prevent wasteful expenditure.
Redundancy is noted in the repeated statement about not conducting the information collection without a valid OMB control number, which could confuse readers. Additionally, privacy concerns may be raised by the disclaimer that while requesters can ask for their personal information to be withheld, such confidentiality cannot be guaranteed.
The broad justification for the survey could be strengthened with concrete examples of past successes or anticipated practical outcomes. Furthermore, while modern collection techniques are mentioned, there is a lack of specifics about which technologies will be used, potentially leaving respondents uncertain about the survey's process.
Impact on the Public
For the general public, this document signals a systematic approach to gathering valuable data which can directly influence the recreation experiences offered at federally managed areas. By participating in the survey, visitors have the opportunity to express their preferences, potentially enhancing recreational offerings.
However, the collection process's implications might vary among different groups. Local residents and frequent visitors may see improvements in services, while privacy-conscious individuals might be hesitant to engage, given the vagueness surrounding the protection of personal data.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Stakeholders, such as recreational organizations and local businesses relying on tourism, could benefit from the insights provided by these surveys. Better-tailored recreation programs can attract more visitors, boosting economic activity in nearby areas.
Yet, there's a concern about the survey's impact on non-responders. The text estimates only a single burden hour for this group, which seems inconsistent and merits clarification to ensure non-responsiveness is adequately considered.
In summary, the Bureau of Reclamation's proposal to renew its information collection through recreational surveys is a stride toward better serving visitors. Careful attention to highlighted issues will enhance the survey's effectiveness and maintain public trust in this federal endeavor.
Issues
• The document does not specify any estimated costs associated with the implementation of the survey, which might be relevant under a review of potential wasteful spending.
• The sentence '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.' is repeated twice, which could be considered redundant.
• The document mentions that an individual can request their personal identifying information to be withheld but states they cannot guarantee it, which may raise privacy concerns.
• The rationale for conducting the survey is broad and could benefit from concrete examples of past successes or specific expected outcomes.
• The explanation for the use of 'appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques' could be clearer about what technologies or methods will be utilized.
• The estimate that each survey question will take approximately 45 seconds to complete might be overly precise without substantiation.
• The mention that 1 burden hour is accounted for non-respondents seems inconsistent with usual practices and would benefit from a clearer explanation.