Overview
Title
Information Collection Request to Office of Management and Budget; OMB Control Number: 1625-0032
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The Coast Guard wants to keep collecting information from people to help make boats safer, and they're asking for ideas and thoughts on whether this is helpful. They're hoping people will tell them what they think by a certain date so they can decide if they should keep doing it like this.
Summary AI
The U.S. Coast Guard plans to submit a request to extend approval for collecting information about vessel safety. This collection involves various forms required under the Coast Guard's Commercial Vessel Safety Program. They are inviting the public to comment on this request before it is finalized. The comments, which are due by May 9, 2025, should address the necessity and impact of this information collection.
Abstract
In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the U.S. Coast Guard intends to submit an Information Collection Request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), requesting an extension of its approval for the following collection of information: 1625-0032, Vessel Inspection Related Forms and Reporting Requirements Under Title 46 U.S. Code; without change. Our ICR describes the information we seek to collect from the public. Before submitting this ICR to OIRA, the Coast Guard is inviting comments as described below.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The document in question is a public notice issued by the U.S. Coast Guard, announcing their intent to seek an extension for an ongoing information collection effort. This initiative falls under the regulatory framework of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. Specifically, it deals with forms and reporting requirements tied to vessel inspection, which are critical components of the Coast Guard's Commercial Vessel Safety Program. The request for an extension, identified as 1625-0032, will be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for approval.
Summary and Purpose
At its core, the document is a call for public participation, inviting comments from stakeholders and the general public on the proposed extension of current data collection practices. The Coast Guard is looking to gather feedback on the necessity, utility, and burden of these reporting requirements. Importantly, these forms pertain to multiple procedural elements for vessel owners and operators, such as Certificates of Inspection and various permits needed for commercial vessel operations.
Significant Issues and Concerns
There are several notable concerns raised by the document. First and foremost is the increase in the estimated annual paperwork burden from 735 to 795 hours. This represents a considerable rise, yet the explanation for this increase is somewhat lacking. Is this due to a higher number of vessels requiring inspections or changes in the methodology for estimating time burdens?
Furthermore, while the Coast Guard hints at embracing automated techniques to ease this paperwork burden, there is no concrete detail on what these might entail. Could digital submission formats or streamlined processes significantly cut down on time and resource expenditure for those submitting this information?
Another point of contention is the document’s use of unexplained acronyms and regulatory citations. This could potentially alienate or confuse readers who are not familiar with bureaucratic jargon. Clear definitions and contextual explanations would make the document more accessible to a broader audience.
Broad Public and Stakeholder Impact
On a broad scale, the vessel inspection and safety program clearly aim to enhance maritime safety and environmental stewardship. By ensuring vessels meet comprehensive safety standards, risks to both human life and marine ecosystems are minimized. This oversight is undoubtedly beneficial to the public at large, particularly those reliant on maritime commerce and transport.
For vessel operators, however, the process can evidently be burdensome. Compliance with these inspection protocols requires time, administration, and potentially, financial resources. The recent increase in estimated time burdens exacerbates these concerns. While comprehensive safety checks are undeniably important, there is an ongoing need to balance this with practical, efficient processes that do not unduly burden operators.
As stakeholders consider their response to this notice, they and the general public may weigh in on how to optimize the collection of this information, suggest ways to reduce bureaucratic red tape, and ultimately ensure that the regulatory obligations set forth are as effective and unobtrusive as possible. The Coast Guard’s receptiveness to public commentary on this topic could potentially guide future policy adjustments and innovations in their operational strategy.
Issues
• The document does not provide specific information on how the Coast Guard plans to reduce the burden on respondents, other than mentioning automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. More details on specific methods could be beneficial.
• The increase in the estimated burden from 735 hours to 795 hours a year needs further explanation to clarify if it is due to a genuine increase in workload or a change in methodology for estimating the burden.
• The use of acronyms and references, such as ICR, OMB, and CFR, without initial definitions might be confusing for readers unfamiliar with these terms.
• The document mentions the opportunity for public comments but lacks details on how feedback will influence the final decision regarding the extension of the information collection request.
• The addresses section could benefit from clearer formatting to improve readability, as the current continuous text might be hard for some readers to navigate.