Overview
Title
Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Reinstatement
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The Department of Agriculture wants to ask local governments about food sickness from things like meat and eggs to make sure everyone stays safe. They want to hear from people about if this is a good idea or if it takes too much time before January 9, 2025.
Summary AI
The Department of Agriculture has submitted a request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and reinstatement of an information collection requirement under the Paperwork Reduction Act. The collection, conducted by the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS), aims to gather feedback from state, local, and tribal governments on outbreaks of foodborne illnesses related to meat, poultry, and egg products. This information will help FSIS improve communication and outreach efforts. The public is invited to provide comments on the necessity, utility, and burden of this data collection by January 9, 2025.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The document from the Federal Register announces that the Department of Agriculture has requested a review and reinstatement of a specific information collection requirement by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This requirement falls under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 and involves gathering data from state, local, and tribal governments regarding outbreaks of foodborne illnesses related to meat, poultry, and egg products. The aim is to enhance the Food Safety and Inspection Service's (FSIS) communication and outreach efforts. Public comments on the collection’s necessity, utility, and potential burden are invited until January 9, 2025.
General Summary
This notice is part of a routine procedure where federal agencies seek OMB approval for collecting new or ongoing information. In this case, the FSIS intends to conduct annual surveys to support its mandate of ensuring food safety as governed by relevant federal laws. The collected information will help FSIS in understanding communication patterns and determining how best to bolster their response during outbreaks.
Significant Issues or Concerns
A prominent concern with this notice is its lack of detail concerning the budget or the costs associated with the information collection. Without these details, it is challenging for stakeholders to assess whether the resources are being allocated efficiently. Furthermore, the notice does not specify how the resulting data will directly benefit FSIS’s operations, leaving the necessity of this data collection somewhat ambiguous.
The document uses technical language such as “practical utility” and “burden of the collection,” which might be difficult for the general public to understand. Providing lay explanations could improve comprehension. Additionally, while mentioning advanced data collection techniques, the notice fails to specify what these methods are, potentially leading to misunderstandings about how the data will be gathered and processed.
Another issue is the vague description in the “Need and Use of the Information” section. Clarification with specific examples of the communication trends and outreach efforts being evaluated would help stakeholders understand the collection's practical applications.
Impact on the Public
Broadly, the document invites public participation, allowing individuals and organizations to voice any concerns or suggestions regarding the collection. By participating, the public can help ensure that the information collection process aligns with public interests and does not impose unnecessary burdens.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
For state, local, and tribal governments, this information collection may require the allocation of resources to respond to the surveys, potentially adding to their administrative duties. However, the outcome could be beneficial if it leads to enhanced preparedness and response measures for foodborne illness outbreaks, ultimately safeguarding public health.
Conversely, if the collection procedures are not well-defined or if the information gathered does not directly lead to actionable improvements, the process could be seen as wasteful or burdensome for these stakeholders.
Overall, while the initiative has the potential to improve public health outcomes, further clarification and stakeholder engagement are necessary to ensure its effectiveness and justify the effort involved.
Issues
• The document does not provide a detailed budget or cost estimate, making it difficult to evaluate potential wasteful spending.
• The notice does not specify how the information collected will directly improve functionalities or performance, which could be necessary to justify the need for the collection.
• The language used, such as 'practical utility' and 'burden of the collection,' might be considered overly technical without lay explanations.
• The document mentions collecting information using 'appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques' but does not clarify what these techniques would entail, leading to potential ambiguity.
• The section 'Need and Use of the Information' could benefit from more specific examples of what 'communication trends' and 'outreach efforts' are being assessed or prioritized.