Overview
Title
Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The Department of Defense wants to collect information about things that happen at the Pentagon. They are asking people to tell them what they think about this plan by February 18, 2021.
Summary AI
The Department of Defense (DoD) is seeking public comment on a proposal to collect information under the Paperwork Reduction Act. This proposal involves the Computer Aided Dispatch and Record Management System (CAD/RMS) and aims to gather data about incidents at the Pentagon and its associated facilities. The collection is voluntary, involves 693 respondents, and takes about 20 minutes per response. Comments are open until February 18, 2021, and can be submitted via the Federal eRulemaking Portal or email.
Abstract
The DoD has submitted to OMB for clearance the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The document titled "Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request" is a notice from the Department of Defense (DoD) regarding a new proposal submitted for clearance by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The proposal pertains to collecting information about incidents that occur at the Pentagon and other facilities under the jurisdiction of the Pentagon Force Protection Agency via the Computer Aided Dispatch and Record Management System (CAD/RMS). This notice invites public comment on the proposal, with a deadline of February 18, 2021. Interested parties are encouraged to submit their feedback through the Federal eRulemaking Portal or via email.
Summary of the Document
The Department of Defense aims to collect data related to incidents to maintain a database through the CAD/RMS. The information gathering is considered necessary to manage and respond to incidents effectively at the Pentagon and affiliated locations. The proposed collection is expected to involve 693 respondents, each spending approximately 20 minutes to provide the necessary information. Participation in this data collection is voluntary, and the DoD emphasizes its importance under the Paperwork Reduction Act.
Significant Issues and Concerns
Several concerns emerge from reviewing this document:
Clarity and Understanding: The document does not clearly specify the types of incidents to be reported, which can lead to ambiguity about its purpose. Potential respondents may benefit from knowing whether incidents range from minor disturbances to major security breaches, enhancing the public's understanding and participation in the feedback process.
Time Estimation: The average burden per response is estimated at 20 minutes. Given the potential complexity of incidents being reported, this duration might be underestimated. Accurate time estimates are crucial for ensuring that potential respondents understand the time commitment involved.
Instructions for Comment Submission: The language around how to submit comments is somewhat complex due to multiple URLs and contact points. Simplifying this information could improve public engagement and participation, ensuring that feedback is accessible to a wider audience.
Public Participation and Outreach: There is no mention of outreach efforts to encourage public comment, which raises concerns about how well the DoD is engaging diverse communities to provide inclusive and comprehensive feedback.
Potential Impacts on the Public
General Public: If implemented effectively, the proposal could enhance safety and incident management at key defense locations. However, unclear instructions or underestimation of the reporting burden might discourage public participation, limiting the diversity and breadth of feedback.
Potential Respondents: Those who may need to report incidents could experience added workloads. It is essential to accurately reflect the burden to ensure respondents are not overwhelmed, which could impact data quality and reliability.
Defense Department and Associated Agencies: The proposal has the potential to positively impact these stakeholders by improving incident reporting and response mechanisms. However, failing to accurately assess the resources required for reporting could hinder its effective implementation.
In conclusion, while the proposal seeks to collect vital data for maintaining security at significant defense sites, clarity, accurate burden assessment, and inclusive public engagement are pivotal to its success. Addressing these areas could enhance participation, leading to better management of safety and security operations.
Issues
• The document lacks clarity on the specific nature of the incidents to be reported in the Computer Aided Dispatch and Record Management System, which might aid in public understanding.
• The average burden per response of 20 minutes seems unreasonably low given the potential complexity of incident reporting, which could hint at an underestimation of the time commitment required from respondents.
• The language used for instructions on where and how to submit comments could be simplified to enhance public participation, particularly given the multiple URLs and contact points mentioned.
• The document does not specify outreach efforts to ensure adequate public comment, which could be a concern for inclusivity and comprehensive feedback.