Overview
Title
Proposed Collection; Comment Request
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The Office of the Secretary of Defense wants to ask people for information to help with their work, and they're asking everyone to say if they think this is a good idea or not. They want this feedback by March 11, 2025, to make sure collecting this information isn't too hard or too unclear for people.
Summary AI
The Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering (OUSD(R&E)) has announced a proposed information collection and is seeking public comments, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The objective is to gather feedback on the necessity, utility, and burden of the data collection process. Interested individuals can submit their comments until March 11, 2025, via the Federal eRulemaking Portal or by mail. The information collected will be used to monitor federal awards, evaluate progress, manage scientific programs, and prepare reports. The expected annual burden of this collection is 24,000 hours, involving 2,000 respondents providing responses twice a year.
Abstract
In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the OUSD(R&E) 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 Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering (OUSD(R&E)) has issued a notice regarding a proposed information collection effort, inline with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The office is soliciting comments from the public about the relevance and utility of the data collection. Comments are open until March 11, 2025, and can be submitted via the Federal eRulemaking Portal or by mail. This process aims to monitor federal awards, assess progress, and support scientific management and reporting duties. The estimated annual effort associated with this project is substantial, requiring 24,000 hours spread across 2,000 respondents.
Issues and Concerns
The document, while providing basic figures and timelines, lacks specificity in several areas. It does not delineate which specific data will be collected, nor does it elaborate on how these data points will be used. This leaves respondents and the public uncertain about the breadth and nature of the information requested. Moreover, the document talks about managing scientific programs and planning future initiatives, terms which remain rather vague without further explanation to clarify their application in practical scenarios.
Additionally, the reported average time burden of six hours per response, even though the effort is biannual, might seem excessive without more context about what the responses entail. This could raise concerns about the practicality and efficiency of this information collection, necessitating a deeper look at the methodology or possible adherence to modern, automated data-collection techniques to lessen the time demand.
Public Impact
For the general public, this information collection process might seem somewhat abstract. Nevertheless, it plays a crucial role in ensuring transparency and effective oversight of federal awards. On a positive note, the feedback solicited from the public is an opportunity for citizens to voice concerns or suggestions about governmental procedures, potentially influencing how such activities are managed.
Stakeholder Impact
Businesses, not-for-profit organizations, and governmental entities at various levels may find themselves directly impacted by this data collection. Particularly, they might invest considerable resources in complying with the data requirements, which could be burdensome in terms of time spent and labor allocated. There might also be confusion or overhead associated with compliance due to the broad language used in the notice.
While some entities may appreciate the structured oversight and evaluation that such data collection facilitates, others may find it onerous, especially if the estimated time burdens are underestimated or if the collection system is inefficient.
In conclusion, while OUSD(R&E)'s initiative seeks to streamline and control federal award spending with careful oversight, its implementation could benefit from providing more detailed guidelines and specifications to ease stakeholders' understanding and contribute to a more informed public commentary.
Issues
• The document does not provide specific details on how the proposed information collection will be conducted or what specific information will be collected. This could lead to ambiguity or misunderstanding about the process.
• The purpose and impact of the information collection process on different types of respondents such as businesses or not-for-profit institutions are not elaborated upon in detail.
• The average burden per response is stated as 6 hours, which might be excessive considering the frequency is semi-annual. Further clarification is needed to justify this time requirement.
• The terms like 'manage scientific programs' and 'plan future scientific initiatives' are broad and could benefit from more specific definitions to clarify how the information gathered will influence these activities.
• While the document invites public comment, it does not specify any instructions or guidelines on the kind of input or feedback that might be especially useful.
• The intended use of the information gathered, especially concerning reports to Congress or other federal agencies, could be clearer, specifically how this data will contribute to policy or decision making.
• The process for minimizing the burden on respondents needs to be more detailed, particularly concerning the implementation of automated collection techniques or usage of information technology.