Overview
Title
Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The Department of Agriculture wants to gather names and addresses from people who run certain utility companies in the countryside, and they're asking for permission to do that. They hope people will tell them what they think about this plan by January 21, 2025.
Summary AI
The Department of Agriculture has submitted an information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review, following the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The request involves using RUS Form 87 to gather names and addresses of officers and directors from borrowers in the rural utilities programs, ensuring accurate and current data for loan administration and protection of governmental interests. This collection applies to not-for-profit and business entities, with 869 respondents expected and 217 total burden hours estimated. Feedback on the necessity and impact of this data collection is invited by January 21, 2025.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The document from the Federal Register involves a notice from the Department of Agriculture requesting comments on an information collection proposal submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The focus of this request is to gather feedback regarding the use of RUS Form 87, intended to collect data such as names and addresses of officers from borrowers under the Rural Utilities Service programs. This measure aims to ensure that the government maintains current and accurate data for the effective execution of loan programs and administration.
Summary and Purpose
The Department of Agriculture is seeking public feedback on its proposal to gather data through a form used by the Rural Utilities Service (RUS). This agency runs programs designed to support rural electric and telecommunications infrastructures by providing loans. The collected information is intended to help maintain accurate records on the officers and directors of the borrowing entities. The request is part of the government’s adherence to the Paperwork Reduction Act, which seeks to minimize the information collection burden on the public.
Issues and Concerns
Several issues and concerns arise from the document. Firstly, the metadata does not include an abstract, which would usually provide a succinct overview of the document's purpose and content, leaving the reader without key context at a glance. Secondly, although the notice requests feedback by a specific date, a clear indication of the comment period's start date could lead to misunderstandings about the timeframe available for public responses.
The technical language and references, such as the "Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995" and the "Rural Electrification Act", may prove challenging for general audiences who are unfamiliar with these legal and administrative frameworks. Additionally, while the text mentions efforts to minimize the burden of data collection on respondents, it does not provide concrete examples of how this could be achieved, potentially hindering understanding or engagement from the public.
Public Impact
The document's procedures are aimed at enhancing the administrative efficiency of government operations concerning rural utilities. For the general public, the request’s impact may not be directly felt; however, ensuring accurate and efficient loan processing might indirectly support improved rural infrastructure, benefiting communities in those areas.
Impact on Stakeholders
For organizations involved—whether not-for-profit or for-profit institutions—this measure may impose a reporting burden, requiring them to allocate time and resources to compile and submit the necessary data. With 869 respondents anticipated, the estimated total burden of 217 reporting hours indicates a relatively modest but collective effort requested from these stakeholders.
Positively, the information collection seeks to ensure transparent and well-documented interactions between borrowers and the government, potentially resulting in more streamlined and reliable loan servicing. By maintaining up-to-date and verifiable contacts for each borrower, the government can protect its interests while facilitating more effective communication and service delivery in the long run.
Issues
• The abstract is marked as null in the metadata, which might suggest a lack of a concise summary of the document's contents.
• The document provides the publication date and the deadline for comments (January 21, 2025), but it could be useful to mention the specific date the comment period starts, providing more clarity.
• No specific action or purpose is clearly stated in the metadata, which might cause difficulty in understanding the main action being undertaken by the agency at a glance.
• The text contains legal references, such as 'Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13', and 'Rural Electrification Act of 1936, 7 U.S.C. 901', which might not be accessible to a general audience unfamiliar with these references.
• The language used is technical and might be challenging for the general public to fully understand without additional context or simplification, such as explaining why the information collection is crucial for government operations.
• The document mentions using methods to minimize the burden of information collection but lacks specific examples or suggestions, which could make it difficult for respondents to understand how their burden might be reduced.