Overview
Title
Information Collection; Government Property
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The DoD, GSA, and NASA want to hear what people think about collecting information about stuff the government owns. They ask if people think this is important and how it can be done better, while making sure it isn't too hard for people to give their opinions.
Summary AI
The Department of Defense (DoD), General Services Administration (GSA), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) are asking for public comments on extending the collection of information related to Government property. They want feedback on the necessity, accuracy, and ways to improve the quality of this information collection. They are also seeking methods to reduce the burden on respondents. The current approval for this information collection is valid until June 30, 2025, but they propose extending it for an additional three years. Public comments are being accepted until May 12, 2025, and can be submitted through the website regulations.gov.
Abstract
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) regulations, DoD, GSA, and NASA invite the public to comment on an extension concerning Government property. DoD, GSA, and NASA invite comments on: whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of Federal Government acquisitions, including whether the information will have practical utility; the accuracy of the 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 the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. OMB has approved this information collection for use through June 30, 2025. DoD, GSA, and NASA propose that OMB extend its approval for use for three additional years beyond the current expiration date.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The Federal Register document titled "Information Collection; Government Property" involves a proposal by the Department of Defense (DoD), General Services Administration (GSA), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to collect public feedback on their information gathering regarding government property. This request for comments is part of an effort to extend the current approval period of this information collection, which is set to expire on June 30, 2025, for an additional three years. The agencies are interested in opinions on the need for this data collection, its accuracy, possible improvements for clarity and utility, and suggestions to reduce burdens on those who provide the information.
General Summary
This notice serves as an invitation for public commentary on an information collection initiative tied to federal government acquisitions related to government property. The comments are solicited in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, highlighting the necessity for the government to evaluate if collecting this information is essential and how it impacts both the efficiency of government functions and the stakeholders involved. The feedback can include ideas on using modern technology to streamline the process and reduce the workload for respondents.
Issues and Concerns
The document is inherently complex, relying on technical jargon that might not be accessible to a general audience. Detailed requirements outlined under the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) clause 52.245-1, specifically the obligations of contractors managing government property, may be difficult to grasp without prior understanding or context. Moreover, the purpose or the practical application of the required data, as well as how it informs government processes, is not elaborately presented, which could hinder meaningful public engagement.
Additionally, the document provides extensive data requirements but lacks transparency in explaining how the estimated burden hours were calculated, which is vital for those assessing the fairness and practicality of this compliance burden. While instructions for submitting comments are provided, clarity around potential limitations, such as character restrictions on submission platforms, could improve ease of engagement for respondents.
The document references specific forms, Standard Forms 1428 and 1429, without offering context or explanations that could aid those not familiar with these forms in understanding their importance.
Impact on the Public and Stakeholders
For the general public, particularly those involved in government contracting or those interested in governance and policy implementation, understanding these processes is crucial for ensuring accountability and transparency in government dealings. As such, simplifying the language and including clear examples or summaries could enhance public understanding and participation.
Specific stakeholders, notably contractors who handle government property, will feel the direct impact of these requirements. While the information collection aims to streamline management and accountability, the administrative burdens can be significant. A more straightforward explanation of how the data support government operations can help stakeholders appreciate the necessity of their input, possibly offsetting the perceived burden.
In conclusion, while the notice meets statutory requirements to invite and evaluate public input, enhancing accessibility through simplification and specificity could extend its reach and effectiveness. By incorporating public feedback into this process, there is potential for improved efficiency in government property management and strengthened collaboration between the government and its contractors.
Issues
• The document utilizes complex language that could be simplified for easier understanding by the general public, particularly in explaining the requirements of FAR clause 52.245-1.
• The document does not provide specific examples or context to clarify the practical utility of the information collection, which might make it difficult for the public to assess its necessity.
• The detailed list of information required from contractors could benefit from additional explanations or examples, particularly regarding how each piece of information is used in practice.
• The document could include more information on how the estimated burden hours were calculated for transparency.
• The document mentions the ability to submit comments on regulations.gov, but it could be clearer about whether or not there is a character limit for comments submitted directly on the site without attachments.
• The use and roles of Standard Forms 1428 and 1429 are mentioned but not explicitly explained, which may not be immediately clear to readers unfamiliar with government forms.