Overview
Title
Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The Department of Defense wants to make it easier for families who have lost loved ones in the military to visit Army bases, and they're asking if people think it's a good idea. They also want to know if using a paper form is okay or if it would be better to do it on the computer, and they promise to keep everyone's information safe.
Summary AI
The Department of Defense (DoD) has asked the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to review its proposal to collect information for the Survivor Access Card, a program that lets surviving family members visit Army installations. This program allows eligible survivors more accessible access to services and events on military bases using IMCOM Form 44. The DoD is inviting public comments on this proposal by February 10, 2025, and estimates that about 670 people will participate, each spending approximately one hour to complete the process. Public comments can be submitted via the website www.reginfo.gov.
Abstract
The DoD has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for clearance the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The document under review is a notice from the Department of Defense (DoD), specifically the Army, concerning a proposal that has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for approval. The proposal involves the collection of information necessary for the issuance of a Survivor Access Card. This card allows surviving family members unescorted access to Army installations, enabling them to attend events, receive services, and engage with memorials on military bases.
Summary of the Document
The notice indicates that the DoD is inviting public comments on this information collection proposal until February 10, 2025. The information gathered will be used to facilitate the provision of access to military installations for survivors of fallen military members. The process requires eligible individuals to fill out IMCOM Form 44, and about 670 respondents are expected, with each response estimated to take one hour. Public feedback can be submitted via the website provided.
Significant Issues and Concerns
The document raises several concerns. First, there is a noticeable absence of a detailed justification for why this extension is necessary, which would help in balancing the benefits of the program against the administrative burden it places on respondents. The efficiency of the application process also comes into question, as it seems to rely on a physical form. The potential for digitizing this process to improve efficiency and reduce administrative overhead is not addressed.
Another important issue is the lack of detailed instructions on the application process, specifically regarding verification of eligibility and necessary documentation. Such information would be very helpful in ensuring that eligible family members can navigate the application process smoothly.
Moreover, the broad estimation of the time commitment required—listed simply as "1 hour"—could benefit from further explanation to delineate what this time includes. This would provide applicants with better insight into the process and might alleviate concerns about the complexity or time-intensiveness of applying.
Lastly, there is no mention of data protection measures. Given the sensitive nature of the personal information involved, clarity on how this data will be secured is essential to assure respondents that their privacy is safeguarded.
Impact on the Public and Stakeholders
The collection of this information is aimed at a very specific public—the surviving family members of Army personnel. Positively, it could provide significant emotional and practical benefits to these families by allowing them easier access to support services and memorial events, which can be a critical part of the grieving and healing process.
However, the lack of clarity on the process and the reliance on potentially outdated methods of application may inadvertently create barriers, particularly for those less familiar with bureaucratic processes or those with limited internet access. Additionally, failure to address data protection concerns could further alienate participants, discouraging them from utilizing the program out of concern for their privacy.
This proposal's impacts are both positive and negative. On the one hand, the program represents an important recognition of survivors' needs and provides tangible support by granting access. On the other hand, issues in communication, application methodology, and data protection could impede its effectiveness and should be addressed in order to serve its intended purpose fully.
Issues
• The notice lacks detailed justification or impact analysis on why the extension of the information collection is necessary, which might help in better understanding the potential benefits versus the burden imposed.
• The language used to describe the application process for the Survivor Access Card could be more detailed, particularly on how survivors can verify eligibility and what documents might be required.
• The reliance on a physical form (IMCOM Form 44) may not be efficient; consideration for digital or online application processes could streamline access and reduce administrative burden.
• The information about the average burden per response as '1 hour' is fairly broad and could benefit from a breakdown of activities involved that take up this time, providing more clarity on the process.
• The communication strategy for informing eligible survivors about the process could be explained to ensure wider accessibility and understanding.
• There is no mention of how the collected data will be protected or privacy ensured, which is important given the sensitivity of personal data involved for military families.