Overview
Title
Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The Department of Agriculture wants to make sure that farmers are being fair and nice when selling animals like cows and chickens. They want people to tell them how hard it is to keep track of things, but they haven't explained some stuff clearly, like how many people they think need to help and how long it will take everyone.
Summary AI
The Department of Agriculture is seeking public comments on an information collection requirement related to rules and reporting for the livestock and poultry industries, as mandated by the Packers and Stockyards Act. The Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) collects this data to monitor practices in these industries and ensure fairness, preventing deceptive or anti-competitive actions. Public comments are invited until March 26, 2021, and interested individuals can submit feedback on the federal website indicated. The collection involves significant recordkeeping and affects businesses, with over 15,000 respondents expected to comply.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The document, published by the Department of Agriculture, announces a request for public comments regarding an information collection mandate. This mandate falls under the guidance of the Packers and Stockyards Act and targets rules and reporting requirements for businesses within the livestock and poultry sectors. Essentially, the goal of collecting this data is to monitor the industry's financial activities and trade practices to ensure transparency and fairness. Through this initiative, the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) aims to prevent deceptive or anti-competitive actions within these industries.
Summary of the Document
The Department of Agriculture has released a notice inviting public comments on a proposed information collection activity. The collection is meant to gather data that will help ensure fairness in the livestock and poultry industries, overseeing entities dealing with livestock sales and poultry processing. This action aligns with the objectives of the Packers and Stockyards Act, which seeks to shield producers and industry participants from unfair practices.
The notice indicates that the public can submit their comments until March 26, 2021. Submissions should be made through a government website. Businesses participating in this industry—including around 15,371 respondents—are expected to comply by maintaining records and sharing specific information as required.
Significant Issues and Concerns
The document raises several pertinent issues that may warrant further scrutiny:
Respondent Estimation: The number of respondents, 15,371, appears without detailed justification. This lack of explanation might lead some to question whether the number accurately reflects those affected by the regulations.
Burden Hours Calculation: Similarly, the total burden hours calculated—26,137—are provided without a clear breakdown. Respondents may find it difficult to gauge the extent of their time commitments.
Use of Technology: Although there is mention of employing automated or technological methods to gather information, specific strategies or examples are missing, creating uncertainty about how these innovations might ease respondent burdens.
Complex Terminology: The document incorporates regulatory language, such as "unfair, unjustly discriminatory, deceptive, or anti-competitive practices," without providing clear definitions. This could lead to misunderstandings for some stakeholders.
Impact on the Public
The broader public may find increased confidence in the fairness of livestock and poultry markets due to these measures. By deterring deceptive practices, the Department of Agriculture aims to foster a transparent marketplace which could ultimately benefit consumers through fair pricing and quality products.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
For stakeholders within the livestock and poultry industries, the document suggests both potential positive and negative impacts. On the positive side, regulated consistency might offer level playing fields for businesses, preventing unethical competition methods. However, businesses could face a significant administrative burden due to stringent recordkeeping and reporting requirements. Without clear strategies for minimizing these burdens, entities—especially smaller operations—might feel constrained or overwhelmed.
In summary, while the information collection requirement serves a critical purpose of monitoring industry practices and promoting fairness, some aspects of the document may benefit from additional clarifications and justifications to optimize understanding and compliance among affected stakeholders.
Issues
• The document lacks a detailed explanation or justification for the number of respondents, which is stated as 15,371, potentially raising questions about whether this estimate is accurate or necessary.
• There is no detailed breakdown of the total burden hours (26,137) or how they were calculated, which may make it difficult for respondents to understand the time commitment required.
• The document briefly mentions the use of automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques but does not provide specific strategies or examples, leaving uncertainty about how the burden on respondents will be minimized.
• The document uses specialized terms like 'unfair, unjustly discriminatory, deceptive, or anti-competitive practices' without clear or simple definitions, possibly leading to misunderstandings among respondents not familiar with regulatory language.