Overview
Title
Information Collection Request to Office of Management and Budget; OMB Control Number: 1625-0096
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The Coast Guard wants to keep checking on oil spills and strange things happening on the water to make sure everything is safe, but they need to ask if it's okay to keep doing this in a certain way. They are asking people if they think this is important and helpful, and they want to hear what everyone thinks by May 9, 2025.
Summary AI
The U.S. Coast Guard has issued a sixty-day notice requesting comments regarding its plan to seek approval from the Office of Management and Budget to extend an information collection request. This request pertains to reporting oil or hazardous substance discharges and suspicious maritime activities, which is mandatory under various federal regulations. The Coast Guard wants feedback on the necessity and effectiveness of this collection process and is inviting the public to submit comments until May 9, 2025, using the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Any changes or extensions will consider the feedback received.
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: 1625-0096, Report of Oil or Hazardous Substance Discharge; and Report of Suspicious Maritime Activity; 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 from the Federal Register is a notice from the U.S. Coast Guard asking for public comments on its plan to renew a request for collecting information. This request involves reporting instances such as oil spills, hazardous substance discharge, and suspicious maritime activities to the National Response Center. The Coast Guard aims to get feedback on the necessity and efficiency of collecting this data under federal regulations. Comments can be submitted by the public until May 9, 2025.
Significant Issues or Concerns
Several issues emerge from the document. Firstly, it refers to specific federal regulations using technical language and codes like 33 CFR 153.203, which might not be familiar to the public. This might complicate the understanding of the document for those without legal or regulatory expertise.
Secondly, the document mentions "suspicious maritime activity" without thoroughly defining what constitutes such activity. This lack of clarity could lead to inconsistent reporting by the public, as different individuals may have varied perceptions of what is considered suspicious.
Additionally, the Coast Guard notes an increase in the estimated annual hour burden from 3,683 to 3,905 hours. However, the document does not provide details on what caused this uptick in responses, leaving a gap in understanding regarding the factors contributing to the increase.
Another concern is that the document doesn't explain how public comments will influence the Coast Guard's decision regarding the information collection request. There is no clear indication of what might change based on received feedback, potentially discouraging public participation.
Moreover, the notice seeks to extend the process of collecting information but does not specify any improvements or changes, which would be valuable to indicate how prior feedback or developments have shaped the current process.
Finally, no details are provided on the security and privacy measures to protect the information collected from the public. This omission could be worrisome for potential respondents who may be cautious about sharing information without assurance of confidentiality.
Impact on the Public and Stakeholders
Broad Public Impact
The public at large is invited to engage in a governmental process through commenting, which could help shape practices affecting maritime security and environmental safety. Awareness and understanding of how to report these incidents might improve public safety and protect the environment from hazardous spills.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
For stakeholders like vessel operators and owners, the requirement to report might be a routine responsibility, but there could also be negative implications if reporting processes are overly burdensome. Clarity in the requirements and what constitutes suspicious activity will be crucial to reduce any uncertainty or administrative strain.
The increase in the reported burden hours suggests that stakeholders are investing more time in complying with these requirements, which might signal an area needing efficiency improvements or enhanced supportive resources. Properly addressing these concerns in the comments period could lead to more effective and simplified reporting processes in the future.
In summary, while the Coast Guard's initiative is a regulatory necessity for ensuring maritime safety and environmental protection, the document's lack of clarity in certain areas could impact public engagement and stakeholder compliance. Ensuring that the public can easily understand, participate, and trust in the process will be essential for the success of this collection endeavor.
Issues
• The document uses technical language and references specific CFR codes (e.g., 33 CFR 153.203, 40 CFR 263.30), which may be difficult for the general public to understand.
• There is a lack of detailed explanation or examples of what constitutes 'suspicious maritime activity,' which could lead to variability in public reporting.
• The estimated burden increase from 3,683 hours to 3,905 hours is attributed to an increase in the number of responses but lacks detail on what factors caused this increase.
• The document provides no specific information on how the public comments will directly influence the ICR process, making it unclear how public participation will impact the decision on the information collection.
• The document does not specify any changes or improvements to be made to the process of collecting information, despite requesting an extension for it.
• There is no information on what measures are in place to ensure the security and privacy of the information collected from the public, which might be a concern for potential respondents.