Overview
Title
Proposed Collection; Comment Request
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The Defense Department wants to hear what people think about their plan to collect information from U.S. and international students. They want to make sure it's useful and not too much work for everyone involved.
Summary AI
The Department of Defense (DoD) is seeking public comments on a proposed information collection as part of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The goal is to determine if the information collection is necessary, accurately estimates the workload, enhances data quality, and minimizes the burden on respondents. The Defense Institute of Security Assistance Management Information Technology Mission System will gather and manage information on U.S. and international students, as well as DISAM personnel. Public comments are accepted until March 3, 2025, through various submission methods.
Abstract
In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency announces a proposed public information collection and seeks public comment on the provisions thereof. Comments are invited on: whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed information collection; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to minimize the burden of the information collection on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
Summary of the Document
The Department of Defense (DoD), under the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, has issued a notice seeking public comments on a proposed information collection under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. This proposed collection aims to gather data through the Defense Institute of Security Assistance Management Information Technology Mission System. The information to be collected pertains primarily to U.S. and international students and personnel within the Defense Security Cooperation Agency. The agency is seeking feedback to ensure that this information collection serves its intended purpose, is not overly burdensome, and utilizes effective data collection methods. The public is invited to submit comments until March 3, 2025, through specified channels.
Significant Issues and Concerns
The document raises several notable issues and concerns. Firstly, it lacks clarity on how public comments will weigh into the final decision-making process, which may lead to uncertainty about the influence of submitted feedback. The language used throughout the notice is quite technical and bureaucratic, which might deter understanding or engagement from a general audience unfamiliar with such terminology.
The document also mentions reducing the burden on respondents but does not detail how this will be achieved, potentially leaving affected parties confused about specific relief measures. Additionally, although it states that public comments will be viewable online without changes, there is no information on privacy protections for individuals’ personal data, raising concerns about sensitive information handling.
Another concern is the vague frequency description of responses required as “on occasion.” This term lacks precision, leaving respondents unsure about the exact expectations or obligations of providing information.
Impact on the Public and Stakeholders
Broadly speaking, this document can have several impacts on the public and specific stakeholders. For the general public, particularly those who might be affected directly by this information collection, the notice provides an opportunity to participate in government policy-making processes and to express concerns or support regarding data collection practices. However, the technical language used may limit meaningful participation to those with a higher degree of familiarity with policy documents or legal settings.
For stakeholders such as U.S. and international students interacting with the Defense Security Cooperation Agency, the impact could be more direct. The proposed information collection might streamline administrative processes, ultimately benefiting those involved in such educational and training programs. However, there is also the risk of increased administrative load if the collection process is not efficiently managed or if the concerns about data privacy are not adequately addressed.
In conclusion, while the DoD’s effort to invite public comment illustrates transparency and openness to feedback, the effectiveness and positive engagement with this document will largely depend on clarifying the issues noted, simplifying language, and providing stronger assurances regarding data protection and process improvements.
Issues
• The document does not specify how comments will be weighted or considered in the decision-making process, leaving ambiguity about the influence of public feedback.
• The summary extensively uses bureaucratic language like 'public information collection' and 'practical utility,' which might not be easily understood by the general public.
• There is a lack of clear, simplified examples or scenarios to illustrate the practical utility and the necessity of the proposed information collection for those unfamiliar with agency workings.
• The document mentions the need to 'minimize the burden of the information collection on respondents' but does not provide specific examples of how this will be achieved, leaving the approach vague.
• Although it claims to make submissions available for public viewing without change, there's no detail on the privacy measures or protections in place for personal identifiers or contact information.
• The section 'Needs and Uses' provides a broad overview of the system’s functions but lacks a detailed explanation on how these functions specifically support the objectives of the agency.
• The document lists a burden of 2,512 annual hours but does not break down this estimate to show what drives this figure.
• References to U.S. Codes (e.g., 22 U.S. Code 2394) might be unclear to laypersons without additional context or explanation provided within the document.
• The frequency of 'On occasion' for responses is vague and could be made more precise to clarify expectations for respondents.