Overview
Title
Proposed Collection; Comment Request
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers wants to ask people questions about how they enjoy water activities, like fishing or swimming, in the Pacific Northwest. They are inviting everyone to share their thoughts about if this is really important, how much work or time it takes, and if there are easier ways to get their questions answered.
Summary AI
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is seeking public comments on a proposed information collection as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. They are asking for feedback on whether this information collection is necessary for the agency's activities, the accuracy of the estimated burden on participants, and ways to improve or reduce the burden of the collection process. The survey focuses on evaluating changes in economic value from water-based recreation in the Pacific Northwest and involves a mail and phone survey of selected households. Public comments need to be submitted by April 27, 2021, via the regulations.gov portal.
Abstract
In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers announces a proposed public information collection and seeks public comment on the provisions thereof. Comments are invited on: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed information collection; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to minimize the burden of the information collection on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, a component of the Department of Defense, has issued a notice of proposed information collection in response to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. They are inviting public commentary on the necessity and efficiency of this initiative. The information gathered is intended to support an environmental impact assessment related to recreational use in the Pacific Northwest, involving a survey conducted through both mail and telephone. Comments are requested to be submitted by April 27, 2021, via an online portal due to current limitations on receiving written mail.
General Summary
The document outlines a plan for collecting data on water-based recreation in several Northwest states, which will inform a model for assessing the impact of water systems. It specifies survey methods, including a mail-based preliminary screening followed by a telephone survey for eligible participants. The surveyed users will come from households likely impacted by changes in water-based recreation, and the survey seeks to estimate the time and effort required from respondents.
Significant Issues and Concerns
A few areas of concern arise from the notice:
Necessity and Utility of Information: The notice lacks clarity on why this specific information is crucial for the Corps' missions or decision-making processes. The commentary section requests feedback on whether the collected data will have practical utility, yet it does not articulate how this data will directly affect decision-making related to the Columbia River System.
Burden Estimates: While the notice provides an estimate of the annual burden hours associated with survey participation, it does not detail how this figure was calculated, leaving the rationale behind it somewhat obscure.
Data Collection Methods: The shift from mail to phone surveys raises questions about maintaining data accuracy and validity. This challenge is acknowledged, but specifics on methodologies to address these concerns are not provided.
Use of Collected Data: The document is somewhat vague on how the information collected will be used beyond its stated purposes, potentially creating privacy concerns. There is no clear assurance on how personal data will be protected or disposed of after use.
Limited Submission Options: The exclusion of mail submissions due to the pandemic is noted, yet no alternative options are detailed. This could limit participation from those without internet access or proficiency.
Broader Public Impact
The proposed data collection could broadly affect residents in the surveyed regions, primarily by aiding in the management and development of water recreation sites. Enhanced recreational infrastructure or regulations informed by the survey could improve or restrict public access or enjoyment, depending on the outcomes.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Environmental Agencies: These stakeholders may benefit from more substantial data to inform ecological and economic assessments of water systems.
Residents and Recreational Users: Those who use the river systems for recreation might experience changes in access or management of resources. This survey aims to consider these users’ preferences, potentially leading to more attuned policy decisions. However, concerns about privacy and data handling might persist among participants.
Policy and Decision Makers: Accurate data will be critical for informed decisions concerning resource use and environmental impact. This project might provide stronger foundations for impactful policy adjustments, benefiting regional planning and conservation efforts.
Overall, while the document introduces an arguably useful initiative, the lack of clarity and specificity in some areas may lead to confusion or concern, particularly in how it ensures utility, privacy, and accessible input from the public. The Corps might consider addressing these to foster more trust and engagement as the project moves forward.
Issues
• The document lacks clarity on the specific necessity and utility of the information collection, making it difficult to assess its critical nature for agency functions.
• The estimate of the burden of the proposed information collection may not be sufficiently detailed, lacking a breakdown of the assumptions that led to 3,150 annual burden hours.
• There is no mention of how the accuracy and validity of the survey data will be ensured, particularly considering the switch from mail to telephone surveys.
• The language regarding the collection methods (e.g., automated collection techniques) is quite general and lacks specific examples of what technologies or methods will be used.
• There may be a lack of transparency about how collected data will be used beyond the immediate scope of the survey, raising privacy concerns.
• The document doesn't explain why written comments cannot be received via mail at this time, despite potential availability of alternative methods, which might limit accessibility for some commenters.