Overview
Title
Proposed Collection; Comment Request
Agencies
ELI5 AI
In the notice, the Department of Defense (like a big superhero team keeping everyone safe) wants to ask people how they feel about a new form called DD 2875, which helps them make sure only the good guys can use their secret gadgets. They're asking if people think the form is needed, if it’s easy to understand, and how to make it less of a hassle for everyone.
Summary AI
The Department of Defense's Chief Information Officer (CIO) has issued a 60-day notice for a proposed public information collection, inviting public comments by March 7, 2025. This collection is necessary to verify individuals' trustworthiness when they request access to DoD systems, using the System Authorization Access Request Form (DD 2875). The information ensures that system access aligns with national security interests. It is estimated to affect 900,000 respondents annually, with each respondent providing responses as needed, averaging 5 minutes per response.
Abstract
In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the CIO 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
The document, issued by the Department of Defense's Chief Information Officer, details a proposed public information collection that seeks comments from the public by March 7, 2025. The focus is on using the System Authorization Access Request Form (DD 2875) to verify the trustworthiness of individuals who request access to DoD systems. Emphasizing security, this information collection is vital to ensuring that any granted access aligns with national security interests.
General Summary
The Department of Defense is inviting public feedback on a proposed information collection, highlighting its compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The proposal underscores the necessity of validating individuals' trustworthiness before they gain access to sensitive DoD systems and databases. This process is facilitated via the DD Form 2875. Key metrics indicate that the initiative impacts about 900,000 respondents annually, with a cumulative burden estimated at 600,000 hours.
Significant Issues or Concerns
Several issues emerge from the document:
Lack of Detail on Systems Access: While the form is identified as a gateway to system access, the specific systems or types of information covered by the DD 2875 are not detailed. This gap may cause confusion or concern for respondents unsure about the scope of access they are consenting to or applying for.
Estimate of Burden: The document provides a quantitative burden estimate but lacks historical context or data to support the figure of 600,000 annual burden hours. Additionally, it suggests an average of 5 minutes per response, which seems optimistic given the complexities involving security clearance discussions.
Guidance for Public Comment: Although public comments are invited, the document does not provide specific guidelines or prompts for the feedback process. This lack of direction might result in less effective input from the public, which is pivotal for refining such proposals.
Consideration of Automation: The document does not address potential technological solutions or automated processes that could ease the burden of this information collection. Discussing current or future automation efforts could reduce manual data handling and improve efficiency.
Broader Public Impact
On a broader scale, this document affects a significant number of individuals due to its reach and the nature of the information collected. For the general public, the rationale behind collecting such information—national security—might seem compelling, yet the absence of clarity and efficiency might raise concerns about privacy and procedural transparency.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Individuals and Households: This group, being directly impacted, faces the challenge of frequent submissions, which could be time-consuming and bureaucratically taxing. The potential underestimation of time per response might lead to frustration.
DoD: The proposal enables the DoD to enhance its security protocols by ensuring only vetted individuals gain system access. However, if not streamlined, the process could create bottlenecks and negatively impact operational efficiency.
Feedback Contributors: Individuals and organizations interested in contributing to the public commentary may find it challenging without structured guidance, potentially leading to missed opportunities for valuable insights that could inform adjustments or enhancements.
Conclusion
In conclusion, while the document serves an essential purpose in maintaining national security through rigorous access controls, it could benefit from clearer communication and transparency regarding the processes and technologies involved. By addressing the noted concerns, the DoD might improve public understanding and collaboration, ultimately making the procedure less burdensome and more efficient for all stakeholders involved.
Issues
• The document does not specify what systems or types of information the DD Form 2875 is used to access, which could add clarity for the respondents.
• Despite listing the OMB Control Number (0704-0630), no additional context or historical data is provided to validate the estimate of the burden of 600,000 annual burden hours.
• The document mentions that comments are invited on whether the information collection is necessary and ways to enhance it, but it does not provide specific guidelines or examples, which may hinder effective feedback from the public.
• The average burden per response is listed as 5 minutes, but given the potential complexity of security clearance and authorization processes, there might be an underestimation that warrants further explanation or review.
• The language around the "Federal eRulemaking Portal" instructions is clear but does not give examples of comment categories or specific prompts to guide public input.
• There is no discussion of any alternative methods or existing automated technologies currently being considered to reduce the burden of the information collection process, which could be important for minimizing wasteful processes.