FR 2024-31783

The document in question, issued by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) within the Department of Justice, announces a proposed revision to an information collection process concerning the Visitor Access Request, known officially as ATF Form 8620.71. This form is intended to gather necessary personal data to decide on granting access for business purposes at ATF facilities. The revision encompasses a notable change in recognizing the monetized value of participants' time, now quantified at $4,009 annually. Feedback from the public, including federal, state, local, and tribal government representatives, is solicited until March 11, 2025, to improve the project’s effectiveness and efficiency.

General Overview

The notice serves as a formal announcement from the ATF regarding their intent to update a pre-existing collection form. While revising an established procedure, the ATF underscores its alignment with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, aiming to streamline processes and maximize efficiency. The public is encouraged to contribute their insights on various elements of the data collection process, specifically its necessity, accuracy, and potential impact.

Significant Issues and Concerns

Despite the structured layout, several notable issues arise from the document. The mention of the increased monetized value—from $0 to $4,009—lacks a detailed explanation, creating ambiguity about its calculation or justification. Similarly, while the privacy act statement is reportedly updated, the document omits a description of these updates or their implications for respondents. Furthermore, the document advocates for the use of technology to ease the data submission process yet fails to elucidate these technological solutions or specific recommendations adequately.

The contact information, though complete, is densely presented, which might hinder readability and accessibility. Ensuring that such critical information is more clearly structured could greatly assist stakeholders who may need to seek further clarification or provide feedback.

Public Impact

The impact on the general public includes potential improvements in procedural clarity and efficiency at ATF facilities. By revisiting and refining this collection form, the ATF might enhance its operational workflows, facilitating a more streamlined and user-friendly experience for visitors conducting official business.

Stakeholder Impact

The revisions potentially hold varying implications for different stakeholders. For federal, state, local, and tribal government representatives, the requirement to submit personal information could either improve or complicate their interaction with ATF facilities, contingent on how well they understand and comply with the updated processes. The notation of the monetized respondent time suggests a marginal economic dimension to the feedback process, though without a detailed breakdown, the significance of this estimate remains unclear.

Conclusively, while the aim of the revised information collection initiative appears constructive, a few gaps in clarity and justification could limit stakeholder engagement and the overall project's success. These areas require thoughtful consideration and additional clarification to ensure an effective revision process that adequately addresses public and agency needs.

The document addresses a proposal by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) under the Department of Justice, specifically concerning the Visitor Access Request form (ATF Form 8620.71). This form is part of a broader information collection effort submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

One significant financial aspect mentioned is the introduction of a monetized value in the information collection process. Previously, the form did not assign a monetary value to the respondent's time; however, in this renewal, a monetized value of $4,009 has been introduced. This change represents a shift from having no monetary valuation ($0) to assigning a specific dollar amount to the time respondents spend in completing the form. This is part of a revision to acknowledge and account for the economic value of the respondents' time, though the document does not clarify how this figure was precisely calculated or justified.

The document notes an estimated annual cost burden associated with the collection, which is quantified at $4,009. Yet, it does not detail the breakdown of this cost or the methodology used to arrive at this figure, which could be a point of confusion or concern for the affected public. Understanding how these estimates are calculated is crucial for transparency and public trust, as respondents might wish to know how this figure impacts them or reflects on the efficiency of the process.

This monetized valuation and cost burden estimate tie into broader issues raised in the document, particularly concerning the accessibility and utility of the information collected. The methodology for calculating such financial impacts should be transparent to enhance the understanding and support of affected respondents, including state, local, and federal governments. The absence of a detailed financial breakdown leaves a gap in understanding the full context of these costs.

Addressing these concerns would benefit the proposed information collection efforts by providing clearer justifications and explanations. This could minimize confusion and provide assurance that the financial references are carefully considered and appropriately reflected in the information gathering process.