FR 2024-28954

The U.S. Marshals Service, a division of the Department of Justice, has issued a 60-day notice seeking public comments on maintaining the use of Form CSO-005, known as the Preliminary Background Check Form, without any modifications. This form is crucial in collecting information about applicants for Court Security Officer and Special Security Officer positions. Through this form, details about applicants' personal information, previous employment, and financial status are gathered. This process is designed to help hiring officials select candidates with a reliable track record of employment and financial responsibility.

General Overview

The notice, published in the Federal Register, specifies that public feedback is essential for evaluating whether the data collection is necessary and beneficial. It also aims to verify the accuracy of the estimated burden on the public, currently set at 750 hours annually. Public comments will ideally contribute to enhancing the quality, clarity, and utility of the information collected. The total estimated cost burden associated with this data collection process is approximately $14,651.

Significant Issues and Concerns

1. Ambiguity Regarding Vendors: A notable ambiguity arises from the mention of a "Vendor" in the document, without clarification on who this vendor is or their role in the process. This lack of clarity may lead to confusion about who is authorized to provide applicant information and could affect the reliability of the data collected.

2. Cost Estimation Lacks Detail: The document's mention of a $14,651 cost burden lacks a detailed breakdown of expenses. This vagueness could obscure potential inefficiencies or wasteful spending, preventing stakeholders from effectively evaluating the financial implications of the information collection process.

3. Accessibility of Language: The formal language of the document may pose understanding challenges for the general public, potentially limiting effective participation in the comment process. Simplifying language could lead to more inclusive public engagement.

4. Respondent Estimate Unclear: The method for estimating 750 respondents per year is not well-documented, risking inaccuracies in workload and budget planning. A clearer rationale for this estimation would enhance transparency and trust in the data.

Public and Stakeholder Impact

Broad Public Impact: This document has implications for public interaction with government processes. By inviting public comments, it offers a platform for citizens to influence the efficiency and fairness of how security positions are filled within the U.S. Marshals Service. However, the complexity of the document might hinder engagement from a wider audience.

Impact on Job Applicants: For individuals applying for Court or Special Security Officer roles, the continued use of this form means they will undergo a thorough vetting of their employment history and financial status. While this could help ensure qualified candidates are employed, it also places a significant time burden on applicants who must complete the comprehensive form.

Vendor and Administrative Impact: Clarifying the role of vendors could affect how administrative processes are structured. Without clear guidelines, there could be complications in the flow of information, affecting overall efficiency.

In summary, while the ongoing use of Form CSO-005 plays a critical role in vetting applicants for sensitive security positions, the document raises several issues about clarity, cost transparency, and public engagement. Addressing these concerns would bolster the integrity and efficacy of the selection process, ultimately benefiting both the agency and the public.

The document under review provides information about an information collection request by the U.S. Marshals Service, specifically concerning the CSO-005 Preliminary Background Check Form. This form is employed in gathering background information for Court Security Officer and Special Security Officer applicants.

Financial Summary

The document outlines an estimated total annual cost burden of $14,651.00 associated with this collection. However, there is a lack of detailed breakdown explaining precisely what this amount covers. Understanding how this cost has been calculated or allocated among different activities or services is crucial. Without a clear breakdown, it is challenging to determine whether these costs are used efficiently or if there might be areas in need of scrutiny for potential waste or misallocation.

Concerns and Issues

1. Vagueness of Financial Details: The document provides a summed total of $14,651.00 without any accompanying detail or breakdown. This vagueness might lead to confusion or misinterpretation about what expenses are included—whether they cover administrative costs, personnel, technological systems, or other resources. A detailed financial breakdown would help in assessing the appropriateness of this estimated cost and whether it aligns with the expected benefits of the information collection.

2. Relating to Cost Estimation Issues: The document does not clarify how the estimation of 750 respondents was calculated, which directly affects the projected cost burden. Without transparency about how this number was reached, questions about the sufficiency of the cost estimate, including labor or resource allocation, arise. If the estimated number of respondents is inaccurate, it could overstate or understate the financial burden significantly.

Recommendations for Improvement

To improve transparency and public understanding, it would be beneficial for future communications to provide a comprehensive breakdown of financial estimates, such as the $14,651.00 annual burden. Additionally, elucidating the methodology behind the respondent estimation would help ensure accuracy and bolster public trust in the efficiency and necessity of the proposed collection. Such information would better inform public participation, allowing for more constructive input during the commentary period.