Overview
Title
Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The Department of Agriculture wants to make sure animals stay healthy by checking for a bad chicken sickness called HPAI. They need help collecting information about how animals get sick, and people can tell the government what they think about this by January 15, 2025.
Summary AI
The Department of Agriculture has submitted an information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review, as per the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. This request focuses on collecting data related to Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI) testing, surveillance, and reporting in livestock, including dairy cattle. The collection aims to assist with controlling the spread of HPAI, which is highly contagious and deadly to domestic poultry and has been detected in dairy cattle. Interested parties have until January 15, 2025 to submit comments on the necessity and utility of the information collection, its accuracy, and ways to reduce the burden on respondents.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The Department of Agriculture has submitted a request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for approval of a new data collection initiative focused on controlling the spread of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI) in livestock. This submission is part of its compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, aimed at ensuring that federal data collection practices are efficient and justified.
The information collection targets the monitoring and reporting of HPAI, a particularly contagious and devastating virus affecting domestic poultry and, unusually, it has been detected in dairy cattle. Comments from the public are invited by January 15, 2025, focusing on the necessity and efficiency of the data collection, its estimated burden, and suggestions for improvement.
Significant Issues and Concerns
Several issues arise from the document. Primarily, the document does not provide detailed information on the financial implications of the proposed information collection. Without clarity on costs, stakeholders may struggle to assess whether the resources required are justified, raising concerns about potential wasteful expenditure.
Moreover, there is ambiguity regarding the roles and responsibilities of state and industry partners involved in the execution of the Federal Order. The lack of specificity about their financial obligations could lead to misunderstandings or uneven implementation across regions.
The document also proposes actions aimed at encouraging prompt reporting of cattle illnesses, but it does not delineate incentives or a structured process to ensure consistent compliance. This could result in varied responses, potentially undermining the effectiveness of the initiative.
Also noteworthy is a typographical error referring to "High Path Aviation Influenza" instead of the correct term "Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza." Such errors can lead to confusion and undermine the credibility of the document. The claim that HPAI was detected in dairy cattle is also unusual and lacks sufficient context, as HPAI predominantly affects poultry and avian species.
Potential Impact on the Public
For the general public, especially those involved in agriculture, this data collection effort is a critical step in mitigating the risk posed by HPAI. Effective surveillance and reporting can help prevent outbreaks that could have devastating economic effects on the poultry and dairy industries. However, the success of this initiative hinges on clear communication, reasonable cost implications, and structured implementation.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
For farmers and veterinarians, this initiative involves additional reporting and compliance tasks, potentially increasing their workload. If coordinated well, it could also lead to more robust measures against disease outbreaks, thereby protecting their livestock and livelihoods. State animal health officials will need to play a pivotal role in implementing these plans, necessitating clear roles and responsibilities to avoid confusion and inefficiency.
For industry partners, understanding their part in this initiative is crucial for cohesive nationwide implementation. Without clear guidelines, some partners may bear more responsibilities or costs than others, causing disparities in disease management effectiveness.
Ultimately, while the proposal aims to enhance disease control capabilities, concerns about clarity, financial implications, and effective coordination among various stakeholders must be addressed for the initiative to succeed in its intended goals.
Issues
• The document does not provide specific details on the estimated cost or financial implications of the proposed information collection, which might make it difficult to assess potential wasteful spending.
• The 'Need and Use of the Information' section mentions the Federal Order related to testing dairy cattle, but does not clarify the specific roles and financial responsibilities of the state and industry partners, leading to potential ambiguity.
• There is a mention of encouraging farmers and veterinarians to report illnesses quickly, but no clear incentives or systematic process is outlined, which could lead to inconsistent compliance.
• The document outlines various requirements like testing, inspections, and biosecurity plans, but does not provide an estimated cost or resource allocation for these activities, making it difficult to evaluate potential favoritism or wastefulness.
• The term 'High Path Aviation Influenza (HPAI)' seems to be a typographical error and should be 'Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI)', which may cause confusion.
• The mention of HPAI being detected in dairy cattle is an unusual claim without further explanation, as HPAI typically affects poultry and birds, not cattle. This could cause misunderstanding without additional context.