Overview
Title
Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission Under Delegated Authority
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The FCC, which is a government group that helps manage communication like TV and radio, wants people to tell them if they're making things hard with too much paperwork. They want to know if the rules they have are really useful and if there are ways to make things easier for small businesses.
Summary AI
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is seeking public comments on its efforts to reduce paperwork burdens related to information collections, in compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. The FCC is particularly interested in opinions on the necessity and utility of the information collected, the accuracy of its burden estimates, and suggestions on improving the process, especially for small businesses. The information collection under review involves the notification requirements for FM translator or booster stations intending to discontinue operations. Public comments should be submitted by May 12, 2025, and should be addressed to Cathy Williams at the FCC.
Abstract
As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collections. Comments are requested concerning: whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees. The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid OMB control number.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has issued a request for public comments as part of its ongoing commitment to reduce paperwork burdens in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. They are looking to gather insights and opinions from the public and other federal agencies on various aspects related to information collection. Specifically, the FCC seeks feedback on the necessity, utility, and clarity of the information they collect, as well as suggestions for improving the process, particularly in ways that might ease the burden on smaller businesses.
General Summary
The document outlines the FCC's efforts to streamline its processes and reduce unnecessary paperwork, which is important under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). The FCC is interested in whether the information they require from respondents is necessary and practical, and whether their estimates of the time burden are accurate. They also invite suggestions for using technology to reduce this burden, especially for small businesses. This initiative focuses on FM translator or booster stations needing to report any planned discontinuance of operations, a requirement that also ensures compliance with relevant regulations.
Significant Issues and Concerns
One notable issue is the need for clarity around whether the FCC's collections have valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control numbers. This is crucial because collections lacking these numbers cannot be legally enforced. Furthermore, terms like "practical utility" might be too vague for a general audience, potentially making it difficult for them to provide meaningful feedback. The use of bureaucratic language such as "statutory authority" may also be challenging for individuals or small businesses with less exposure to federal regulatory terms.
Additionally, while the document calls for public input on minimizing the information collection burden, it does not offer examples to guide respondents in crafting helpful suggestions. This lack of guidance may limit the effectiveness of the feedback received.
Impact on the Public
Broadly, this document underscores a step toward a more efficient federal regulatory process, reducing unnecessary burdens on the public. The opportunity for public comments means that individuals and organizations can have a say in how regulations affecting them are shaped and applied. This initiative is particularly relevant for businesses that interact with the FCC, as it directly affects how they report and manage regulatory compliance.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
For small businesses, particularly those with fewer than 25 employees, the FCC's efforts have potential positive outcomes as they look to make compliance more manageable and less time-consuming. However, the lack of clear guidelines on how to provide effective feedback could be a deterrent for these stakeholders, given their limited resources and time. On the other hand, clear communication and the inclusion of practical examples could empower these entities to participate in the process more fully, resulting in regulations that better reflect their realities.
Overall, the FCC's initiative is a positive step toward refining regulatory processes. However, for it to be as effective as possible, the Commission may need to address the clarity of language and provide more structured guidance to facilitate meaningful public engagement.
Issues
• The document mentions that the FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number, but it does not specify if the collections mentioned already have such a number.
• The term 'practical utility' used in discussing comments is vague and may require clarification for a general audience to contribute meaningful feedback.
• While the document requests comments on ways to minimize the burden of information collection, it does not provide examples or guidelines, which might assist respondents in formulating their responses.
• The document uses bureaucratic terminology such as 'statutory authority' and 'obligation to respond,' which might not be easily understood by all potential respondents, especially those from small businesses with fewer than 25 employees.
• Although the document mentions that no person shall be subject to penalties for failing to comply with a collection of information without a valid OMB control number, it might be helpful to state more explicitly what protections are in place for respondents in such cases.