Overview
Title
Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The Department of Agriculture wants people to tell them what they think about a form they want to use for volunteers, who help out for free. They are asking if the form is important and if it could be improved, and people have until March 22, 2021, to share their thoughts.
Summary AI
The Department of Agriculture has submitted an information collection requirement to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. Public comments are invited on the necessity, utility, and accuracy of the information collection, as well as suggestions to minimize burden, with a deadline of March 22, 2021. This collection relates to a program allowing the Farm Service Agency (FSA) and Risk Management Agency (RMA) to use volunteers for various activities, requiring participants to complete the "Service Agreement and Attendance Record." The information helps document volunteer work for the USDA, particularly for those not receiving compensation.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The document from the Federal Register details a notice from the Department of Agriculture, which has submitted an information collection requirement for review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This submission is part of compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, aiming to ensure that any collection of information by federal agencies is necessary and not overly burdensome.
Summary of the Document
The Department of Agriculture is gathering public comments regarding the necessity and efficiency of its information collection for the volunteer programs run by the Farm Service Agency (FSA) and the Risk Management Agency (RMA). These programs allow volunteers to engage in agency activities without compensation. Volunteers, once accepted, are required to fill out a "Service Agreement and Attendance Record," which helps document their contributions for the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA).
Significant Issues or Concerns
One key concern is the lack of detail regarding how the collected information is necessary for the agency's functions. Without a detailed explanation, stakeholders may question its practical utility. Additionally, the submission does not fully disclose the methodology and assumptions underpinning the agency's estimates regarding the burden of collecting this information. This omission could raise doubts about the validity of these estimates.
Moreover, the document's instructions for submitting comments could be perceived as slightly convoluted, potentially confusing individuals interested in participating in the commentary process. Another area of concern is the vague description of the volunteer activities, which does not clarify the scope or limits of these roles. This could lead to apprehension about the nature of volunteer assignments.
Potential Impact on the Public
The proposed information collection might seem to have nominal public impact due to its minimal specified burden of 20 respondents and 20 hours collectively. Such a low estimate could lead to perceptions that the program's reach and volunteer engagement might not be significant, potentially affecting public interest in participation.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
For volunteers, particularly individuals or households who wish to participate in USDA programs without compensation, the lack of detailed privacy and data protection measures concerning their personal information from the "Service Agreement and Attendance Record" could be a deterrent. Ensuring clear communication about how their data is handled securely is crucial for maintaining trust and encouraging participation.
Overall, while the initiative of engaging volunteers in USDA activities can have positive effects by providing valuable experiences and support for federal programs, clear and comprehensive communication regarding the necessity, scope, and data management of the program will be essential in addressing public concerns and enhancing participation.
Issues
• The document does not provide a detailed breakdown of the necessity or practicality of the information collection, leading to potential ambiguity in its necessity for agency functions.
• The methodology and assumptions used by the agency to estimate the burden and practicality of the information collection are not fully detailed, which could lead to questions about the validity of these estimates.
• The language used to describe the process for submitting comments is somewhat convoluted, especially instructions on how to find the information collection on the website, which could confuse respondents.
• The document does not specify the nature of activities volunteers will perform, leading to potential concerns about the scope and limits of volunteer assignments.
• The potential burden on respondents is understated with only 20 respondents and 20 burden hours annually, which appears minimal and may not accurately reflect the broader scope or potential variability of volunteer programs.
• Details on how the information from 'Service Agreement and Attendance Record' will be securely stored and managed are not provided, raising potential privacy and data protection concerns.