FR 2025-05196

The document from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Department of Homeland Security, is a public invitation for comments concerning the continuation of collecting information on hotels and motels that meet fire safety standards, as mandated by the Hotel and Motel Fire Safety Act of 1990. This collection process maintains a National Master List of accommodations that are safe from fire hazards, which federal employees are encouraged to use when traveling for official duties.

General Summary

The document outlines FEMA's plan to submit the information collection for review by the Office of Management and Budget. The collection is intended to remain unchanged and fulfills legal obligations to ensure accommodation safety. The communal use of this list provides assurance to all travelers regarding fire-safety criteria in lodgings. Public comments are invited until April 28, 2025, focusing on the necessity, utility, and burden of this information collection.

Significant Issues and Concerns

Several issues arise from the document that may benefit from further clarification:

• Cost Transparency: The total annual cost of $104,267 to the Federal Government is stated without providing a detailed breakdown or explanation. Understanding this expense's specifics could enhance transparency and justify the need for taxpayer dollars.

• Difference in Respondent and Response Numbers: There is a discrepancy between the estimated number of respondents (2,021) and the estimated responses (2,630), suggesting some respondents may provide multiple responses. However, the document does not clarify this aspect, potentially leading to questions about its accuracy.

• Purpose and Utility of Data Collection: While the collection satisfies statutory requirements, a clearer explanation of how the data is utilized and the specific benefits derived from it would substantiate its practical utility and necessity.

• Public Participation and Inclusivity: The document lacks explicit strategies for outreach and ensuring diverse public participation in the comment period. This absence may raise concerns about inclusivity and gathering a broad range of public opinions.

• Complexity of Instructions: Instructions for submitting comments might be confusing for individuals unfamiliar with regulatory processes. Simplifying these steps or providing examples might encourage broader engagement.

Impact on the Public

This document's impact on the public is twofold. Broadly, it upholds safety standards in public accommodations, ultimately benefiting travelers by identifying safe lodgings. The list's availability to all travelers enhances consumer protection.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

Specific stakeholders, including federal agencies and employees, benefit from using recognized, fire-safe accommodations during travel. Businesses operating hotels or motels also have vested interests, as inclusion on the list could increase patronage by government and other safety-conscious travelers.

However, procedural complexity and insufficient engagement strategies might hinder public understanding and participation. Without addressing these concerns, some valuable feedback might be unintentionally excluded, limiting potential improvements to the process or benefits that could be attained.

Overall, while the initiative is well-intentioned and mandated by law, greater clarity and engagement strategies could enhance public understanding and participation, leading to a more effective implementation of safety standards across public accommodations.

The document under review discusses the FEMA's request for comments regarding an extension of the Federal Hotel and Motel Fire Safety Declaration Form. Financial elements are present, specifically the costs associated with this information collection process, both for respondents and the federal government.

The document identifies an estimated total annual respondent cost of $40,178. This amount is associated with the time and resources respondents expend in filling out the Fire Safety Declaration Form. Crucially, the document specifies that there are no additional operation and maintenance costs or capital and start-up costs for respondents, which clarifies that businesses and governmental entities participating in this process face minimal financial burden aside from the time commitment.

In terms of government expenses, the estimated total annual cost to the Federal Government is $104,267. Unfortunately, the document lacks a detailed breakdown or explanation of what this amount covers, leading to potential concerns about transparency and how these government funds are utilized. A more granular view of these costs would provide better accountability and justification for the expense.

Additionally, the document states an estimated number of 2,021 respondents and 2,630 responses. However, it does not clarify the reason for the discrepancy where there are more responses than respondents. This might suggest that some respondents are submitting multiple entries, yet the document leaves this point unexplained. Such clarity could ensure a better understanding of the process and financial impact on respondents.

Overall, the financial references in the document raise questions regarding transparency and detail, particularly regarding the federal government's costs. Further elaboration on these issues could alleviate concerns and provide the public with a clearer picture of the financial implications of this information collection extension.