FR 2024-28813

The document under review outlines the U.S. Coast Guard's request for comments on its Information Collection Request (ICR) regarding crewmember identification documents. This request is being forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for an extension of approval. The primary aim is to ensure that crewmembers on vessels visiting U.S. ports have valid identification that can be verified upon demand. This effort is in compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

Key Issues and Concerns

Several concerns arise from the document. Firstly, it lacks detail about the specific benefits or outcomes expected from collecting crewmember identification documents. Without this information, it becomes challenging to assess the practical utility or necessity of this data collection, raising questions about whether it effectively enhances security or administrative efficiency.

Another significant issue is the absence of specific details regarding what data is captured in these identification documents. This lack of clarity could lead to concerns about privacy, as individuals and entities affected may not fully understand the privacy implications or how their data will be used, stored, or protected.

The document notes an increase in the estimated annual hour burden from 32,955 to 35,724 hours, attributed solely to a rise in the number of responses. However, there is no detailed explanation or breakdown provided to justify this rise, leaving room for doubt over the calculation's accuracy and whether it appropriately reflects the additional time or resources required.

Moreover, while the document includes detailed instructions on how to submit comments, it does not clearly explain how those comments will be considered or integrated into the Coast Guard's final analysis and decision-making. This could deter public participation if individuals feel unsure whether their input will be meaningfully addressed or reflected in the outcome.

Public Impact

Broadly speaking, the document may impact the public by potentially imposing additional administrative tasks on vessel operators and crewmembers. The increase in time spent fulfilling these identification requirements might translate into higher operational costs, which could, in turn, affect shipping operations and logistics in terms of efficiency and scheduling.

Impact on Stakeholders

For specific stakeholders such as vessel operators and crewmembers, this data collection requirement could mean adjusting to increased administrative duties. On the positive side, if effectively implemented, it might enhance security by ensuring that only verified personnel can enter U.S. ports, thereby contributing to national security efforts.

However, it is also crucial to consider the privacy concerns associated with handling personal identification information. Stakeholders may feel apprehensive if the document does not assure clear privacy protections or if the scope and depth of data collection are not transparent.

Conclusion

While the Coast Guard's effort to renew its information collection approval may aim to bolster security and efficiency, the document could benefit from greater transparency and specificity. Addressing the outlined issues would not only help in gaining stakeholder trust but also ensure that the process remains efficient, balanced, and justifiable. Public and stakeholder engagement is pivotal, and their feedback should be meticulously considered to refine and optimize data collection strategies.