Overview
Title
Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The FCC wants to know what people think about rules for collecting information, to make sure they're not making it too hard for small businesses and others. They're looking for ideas to make things easier and more useful, but people don't have to share info unless there's an official number that says they should.
Summary AI
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is requesting public comments on certain information collections as part of their efforts to reduce paperwork burdens, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). They are particularly interested in feedback about whether the information is useful, the burden estimates' accuracy, and ways to improve or reduce the burden, especially for small businesses. The FCC emphasizes that no one is obligated to provide information unless an authorized Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number is displayed. Comments should be submitted by March 22, 2021.
Abstract
As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collections. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees. The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid OMB control number.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The document announces that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) seeks public input on specific information collections under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). The goal is to mitigate unnecessary paperwork burdens on the public, and the FCC invites feedback regarding the necessity, accuracy, and practicality of the information being collected. The notice is targeted at ensuring that all collections are beneficial, that the burden on respondents is minimized, and that the process remains efficient, particularly for small businesses. Comments are requested by March 22, 2021.
General Summary
The FCC is engaging in a process of public consultation to review certain collections of information. This arises out of the need to comply with the PRA, which seeks to minimize the workload that regulatory requirements place on individuals, businesses, and other institutions. The document specifies that the Commission cannot mandate information collection without a valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number, indicating a formal process for managing this burden.
Significant Issues and Concerns
A primary concern emerges in the discussion, or lack thereof, regarding what constitutes "substantial service" under Section 90.529. The absence of explicit criteria could lead to uncertainties for applicants who need to demonstrate compliance to retain benefits under their State licenses.
Additionally, while the document specifies that confidentiality is not needed, this may raise apprehensions if sensitive information could be part of the data collected. Clarity around data protection would be helpful to mitigate such concerns.
The heavy use of technical jargon, such as "interoperability channels" and "band plan," might result in confusion among readers who are not well-versed in these terms. Offering more lay explanations would help broaden understanding among the general public.
The mixed formatting of email addresses in the document might lead to confusion. Consistent formatting would be preferable to ensure clarity and correctness when contacting the appropriate FCC representative.
Finally, although the document mentions minimizing burden through automated collection techniques, it does not provide details about how the FCC intends to do so. This lack of detail could leave stakeholders unclear about the practicality of the proposed changes.
Impact on the Public
This initiative by the FCC has broad implications for the public, aiming to reduce unnecessary collection burdens, which can be time-consuming and costly. By ensuring that only necessary and useful data is collected, the Commission promises a more efficient approach, potentially saving time and resources for both the FCC and respondents.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
For small businesses, the reduced burden of paperwork is particularly beneficial as it conserves limited resources, allowing them to focus on growth and operations instead of regulatory compliance. Ensuring clarity and reducing ambiguity in the collection process could result in less administrative hassle for these stakeholders.
However, state, local, and tribal governments, as well as not-for-profit institutions, are key respondents to these collections and must manage the obligations described in the document. Any lack of clarity, particularly concerning terms like "substantial service," could pose challenges in compliance.
Overall, while the FCC’s efforts to streamline information collection are commendable, addressing the noted issues could enhance understanding and compliance, thereby benefiting both the FCC and the broader respondent community.
Issues
• The document does not explicitly state the criteria for determining substantial service under Section 90.529, which may lead to ambiguity in applicant expectations.
• The section on confidentiality suggests there is no need for confidentiality, which might concern respondents if sensitive information could be involved.
• The document uses technical terms like 'interoperability channels', 'band plan', 'narrowband segments' without lay explanations, which could confuse readers unfamiliar with these terms.
• The call for comments could be more detailed in terms of explaining 'paperwork burdens' and how they are assessed or quantified.
• The use of mixed formatting styles for email addresses might cause confusion (e.g., *PRA@fcc.gov* uses asterisks, while *Nicole.Ongele@fcc.gov* does not).
• There is no detailed explanation of how the FCC plans to use automated collection techniques to minimize the information collection burden as mentioned.