Overview
Title
Intent To Request Extension From OMB of One Current Public Collection of Information: Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC®) Program
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The government wants to check if everything about a special ID card for transport workers is done efficiently, so they ask people to tell them what they think about it. This ID helps workers get into safe areas at ports, and the government is seeing if this works well and if they can make any improvements.
Summary AI
The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has announced a request for public comments on an existing information collection for the Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC®) Program. This program, done in collaboration with the U.S. Coast Guard, involves collecting biographic and biometric data to conduct security threat assessments required for access to secure maritime areas. The TSA is proposing an extension of this information collection and is reviewing feedback on the necessity, utility, and burden of the data collection process. Comments are invited until February 10, 2025, and further details can be found on https://www.reginfo.gov.
Abstract
The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) invites public comment on one currently approved Information Collection Request (ICR), Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number 1652-0047, abstracted below that we will submit to OMB for an extension, in compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). The ICR describes the nature of the information collection and its expected burden. The collection involves the submission of biographic and biometric information that TSA uses to verify identity and conduct a security threat assessment (STA) for the Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC[supreg]) Program, and a customer satisfaction survey.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The document in question is a call for public comments from the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) regarding the Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC®) Program. This initiative, which operates in collaboration with the U.S. Coast Guard, is essential for ensuring secure access to maritime facilities by evaluating potential security threats through detailed biographic and biometric data collection. The TSA is requesting feedback on the continuation of this information-gathering effort to determine its efficiency, accuracy, and burden on individuals. This commentary examines the document's implications on various stakeholders and the public, alongside addressing any apparent concerns.
General Summary
The TSA's TWIC program is pivotal in maintaining security within the maritime sector by vetting individuals who need access to secure areas. The program requires applicants to undergo a Security Threat Assessment (STA), which involves submitting personal and biometric information. This notice serves as a public invitation to scrutinize the program's information collection methods and weigh in on its necessity and execution. Public comments on these matters are sought until February 10, 2025. The document outlines current procedures, fees involved, and the estimated number of respondents, while also encouraging feedback to potentially improve the program.
Significant Issues and Concerns
Several issues arise from the document's content that warrant consideration:
Fee Structure Transparency: The document lists various fees for obtaining and replacing a TWIC card but does not justify these costs or break them down. This absence of transparency might lead to questions regarding how these fees are calculated and if they are fair.
Complex Renewal Criteria: The section outlining the eligibility requirements for online renewal is somewhat complex. Simplifying the language could help applicants better understand the process and criteria, potentially increasing accessibility for stakeholders.
Unclear PreCheck Requirements: Although the document mentions that TWIC holders might qualify for TSA PreCheck, it lacks specific eligibility criteria. Explicitly stating these requirements would enhance clarity for those interested in expedited airport screening.
Lack of Feedback Visibility: While inviting comments, the document fails to specify whether previous feedback has led to any changes in the program. This absence of a feedback loop might discourage stakeholders who wish to see tangible outcomes from their input.
Customer Satisfaction Survey Use: Though a customer satisfaction survey is mentioned, there is no elaboration on how the collected data is utilized for program improvements. More transparency on this front could reassure participants that their opinions are valued and acted upon.
Assessment of Burden: With an expected 619,807 respondents and an annual burden of 573,168 hours, the document does not contextualize whether these figures are efficient or optimized. This lack of clarity might raise concerns regarding the process's efficiency.
Impact on the Public
The information and procedures outlined in the document primarily aim to uphold national security within the maritime environment, which is crucial for the general public's safety. However, the efficiency, transparency, and accessibility of the process can significantly influence public perception and participation in such security measures.
Impact on Stakeholders
Positive Impacts: - Security Assurance: For entities reliant on maritime security, such as ports and shipping companies, the TWIC program provides a robust system for monitoring and controlling access, thereby reducing potential vulnerabilities. - Enhanced Screening Options: Stakeholders who qualify for TSA PreCheck enjoy the benefit of reduced waiting times at airports, streamlining travel experiences.
Negative Impacts: - Cost Concerns: Individuals required to obtain a TWIC card might face financial burdens due to the associated fees, especially if the fees seem unjustified. - Process Complexity: The complexity of the renewal criteria and the lack of clarity around online options may discourage some from participating in the program or lead to compliance issues. - Limited Feedback Awareness: Without visible feedback mechanisms, stakeholders might feel their concerns and suggestions lack consideration, potentially eroding trust in the system.
Overall, while the TWIC program serves a crucial role in transportation security, addressing these concerns and improving communication and transparency could enhance its efficacy and acceptance among those it affects.
Financial Assessment
The Federal Register document from the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) involves several financial elements related to the Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC®) Program. The document outlines various fees associated with this program, which are essential for stakeholders to understand.
Summary of Financial References
The TSA document specifies several fees associated with the TWIC program. These include:
- A $125.25 fee to cover the cost of the Security Threat Assessment (STA) required for issuing a TWIC.
- A reduced fee of $93.00 applicable if the applicant has previously completed a comparable STA through other governmental programs.
- A $60.00 fee for the replacement of lost, damaged, or stolen TWIC cards.
- A $98.25 fee charged to qualified merchant mariners who opt not to receive a TWIC card.
- A $117.25 fee for those renewing their TWIC online, encompassing a new STA.
Relating Financial References to Identified Issues
One key issue identified in the document is the lack of transparency in the fee structure. While the document lists several specified charges, it does not provide a comprehensive breakdown or justification for these amounts. For example, the $125.25 STA fee and its reduced version at $93.00 lack contextual explanation regarding what each covers or why these specific amounts are set. Such missing information could frustrate stakeholders who might question the equity or necessity of these fees.
Another issue is the complexity in describing online renewal eligibility, which could lead to confusion. The renewal fee of $117.25, while clearly stated, may not be as impactful if applicants cannot easily ascertain their eligibility, potentially leading to misunderstandings about the financial obligations involved.
Moreover, the document mentions TWIC holders' eligibility for TSA PreCheck based on certain requirements but fails to specify these qualifications. If fees were attached to this benefit, stakeholders might want more information to understand the costs fully and benefits relationship, which is missing, although no specific fee for TSA PreCheck is addressed here.
The anticipated levels of program engagement, including 619,807 respondents and an annual burden of 573,168 hours, suggest significant financial implications. Ensuring that the fee structure aligns efficiently with operational costs is critical, yet the document does not elaborate on how these collected fees are used within the program or whether efficiencies have been sought based on previous feedback. This omission might concern those interested in the financial stewardship of the program.
Overall, improved transparency and clarity regarding how these fees are determined, utilized, and justified could enhance stakeholder trust and engagement in the TWIC program.
Issues
• The document mentions various fees associated with obtaining a TWIC card, such as $125.25 for the STA, $93.00 for a reduced fee, $60.00 for replacement, and $98.25 for certain Merchant Mariners, but does not provide a breakdown or justification for these amounts. This could raise concerns about the transparency of the fee structure.
• The language describing the criteria for online renewal eligibility is somewhat complex, which may lead to confusion among potential applicants. Simplifying this section could enhance clarity.
• The document states that TWIC holders can participate in TSA PreCheck if they meet certain requirements, but it does not specify what these requirements are. Providing these specifics could improve the document's clarity.
• While the document invites comments to minimize the burden of information collection and improve processes, it does not specify what changes have been made or considered in response to previous feedback. This lack of feedback loop might concern stakeholders interested in seeing how past input has been addressed.
• The procedure for handling and processing the optional customer satisfaction survey is not fully elaborated, including how this data is used to create actionable insights to improve the program. This could be perceived as lacking transparency.
• The document anticipates 619,807 respondents with an annualized hour burden of 573,168 hours for the TWIC information collection. Without more context, it is difficult to assess if this level of burden is reasonable or optimized, possibly raising efficiency concerns.