[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 206 (Tuesday, October 27, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55269-55272]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-25757]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
Improving Implementation of the Paperwork Reduction Act
AGENCY: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget.
ACTION: Request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) oversees agency
information collection activities under the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (PRA). While information collection is critical to evidence-based
decisions and informed government operations, unnecessary paperwork
requirements can impose serious burdens on the public, especially small
entities. The PRA requires Federal agencies to minimize the burden on
the public resulting from their information collections, and to
maximize the practical utility of the information collected. OMB is
committed to working with agencies and the public to promote compliance
with the PRA and to reduce
[[Page 55270]]
unnecessary paperwork and improve PRA guidance and implementation. To
that end, OMB is inviting comments from the public on how to strengthen
and improve implementation of the PRA. Specifically, OMB seeks comments
on reducing current paperwork burdens, especially on small entities;
increasing the practical utility of information collected by the
Federal Government; ensuring accurate burden estimates; and preventing
unintended adverse consequences.
DATES: To ensure consideration, responses must be written and received
by December 28, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments by one of the following methods:
Web site: www.regulations.gov.
E-mail: [email protected].
Fax: (202) 395-7245.
Comments submitted in response to this notice may be made available
to the public through relevant Web sites. For this reason, please do
not include in your comments information of a confidential nature, such
as sensitive personal information or proprietary information. If you
send an e-mail comment, your e-mail address will be automatically
captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the
public docket and made available on the Internet. Please note that
responses to this public comment request containing any routine notice
about the confidentiality of the communication will be treated as
public comments that may be made available to the public
notwithstanding the inclusion of the routine notice.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mabel Echols, Office of Information
and Regulatory Affairs, Records Management Center, Office of Management
and Budget, Room 10102, NEOB, 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC
20503, Telephone: (202) 395-6880.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In this Federal Register notice, OMB seeks
public comments on possible initiatives to improve the implementation
of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA)--and in particular, to
reduce the paperwork burden on the public, especially on small
entities; to maximize the utility of the information collected; to
ensure accurate burden estimates; to improve the process of OMB review;
and to prevent unintended adverse consequences. OMB plans to use the
comments it receives in response to this notice to inform its
preparation of the 2010 Information Collection Budget (ICB), which is a
report that will be provided to Congress on the Federal Government's
effectiveness in implementing the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. OMB
will also use these comments to inform its practices for evaluating
information collections submitted to OMB by agencies.
Improving Paperwork Burden Estimates
Agencies estimate PRA paperwork burden in terms of the time and
financial resources the public devotes annually to responding to
information collections. The term ``burden'' means the ``time, effort,
or financial resources'' the public expends to provide information to
or for a Federal agency, or otherwise fulfill statutory or regulatory
requirements. 44 U.S.C. 3502(2); 5 CFR 1320.3(b). ``Burden'' therefore
includes:
Reviewing instructions;
Using technology to collect, process, and disclose
information;
Adjusting existing practices to comply with requirements;
Searching data sources;
Completing and reviewing the response; and
Transmitting or disclosing information.
Currently, agencies estimate and report the burden of these
activities in terms of the time, or burden hours, and the financial
costs that the public devotes to reporting, recordkeeping, and
disclosure requirements. In estimating the time and resources devoted
to information collections, agency Chief Information Officer offices
typically consult agency program staff, who are responsible for
managing the information and thus possess the substantive knowledge
that is essential to estimating the number of respondents to an
information request relating to that program. The agency then uses its
knowledge of the program to consider how much time a respondent would
need to respond to the information request. Multiplying the amount of
time per respondent by the number of respondents and the number of
times the information is submitted each year produces the total annual
burden hours imposed by a given collection.
After agencies produce a preliminary burden estimate, several
reviews of its accuracy take place. First, agencies solicit public
feedback on the accuracy of their estimates in Federal Register notices
that provide for an initial 60-day public comment period. Any comments
received by the agency are used to refine the estimate that is
submitted for OMB review. Second, OMB analysts who review agency
information collection requests (ICRs) can provide comments on the
agency's estimate. Finally, OMB review is accompanied by a second, 30-
day public comment period (initiated with a second Federal Register
notice), during which the public can again submit comments on the
burden estimates.
Agencies have worked hard to improve their burden estimates, and
several agencies have undergone extensive studies to do so. For
example, the Internal Revenue Service accounts for a large share (over
76 percent) of the Federal Government's total paperwork burden. In
light of this fact, the IRS has devoted considerable resources to
measuring the burden it imposes on taxpayers so that policymakers and
the public can better understand the cost to society of tax collection
and compliance with the Internal Revenue Code. The IRS has made efforts
to improve the accuracy and transparency of taxpayer burden estimates.
Starting in FY 2006, the IRS began using a new methodology based on a
statistical model--the Individual Taxpayer Burden Model (ITBM)--to
estimate the reporting burden imposed on individual taxpayers. The
ITBM's approach to measuring burden focuses on the characteristics and
activities of individual taxpayers rather than the forms they
ultimately use.
Despite public input and certain common methodological techniques,
agency estimation methodologies can sometimes produce imprecise and
inconsistent burden estimates. Some agencies have relied on program
analysts to generate burden estimates based on their individual
consideration of, for example, the number and types of questions asked,
what records will need to be created and maintained, how long it will
take people to complete these and other tasks, and how many people will
be performing the tasks. These officials are often experts in their
areas of responsibility and are usually familiar with the public's
experience with responding to information collections they oversee. In
some cases, however, it is not clear that their estimates are based on
sufficiently rigorous or internally consistent methodologies. This is a
particular concern in the case of large collections, the burden of
which may be measured in millions of hours or tens of millions of
dollars.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For more information on how agencies estimate their
paperwork burden, please refer to pages 29-39 of the Information
Collection Budget of the United States Government, FY 1999, Office
of Management and Budget, which can be found at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/assets/omb/inforeg/icb-fy99.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 55271]]
In addition, OMB is aware of the possibility that information
collections may impose significant burdens on small businesses. Because
of economies of scale, a collection may be more burdensome for a small
entity than for a large one. However, currently there is no uniform
method for agencies to account for situations in which a collection may
have a disproportionate impact on a particular type of respondent, such
as a small entity.
In summary, there is some variation across individual agencies in
the methodologies used for estimating the time and financial burden
associated with their collections. This variation makes it difficult to
ensure accurate assessment on the part of all individual agencies and
to upgrade government-wide performance in implementing the PRA.
OMB Seeks Comment on How To Improve the Current Situation, Including:
Examples of substantially inaccurate burden estimates for
information collections, including an analysis of the inaccuracy and,
if possible, the collection's OMB Control Number.
New or improved practices for estimating burden, such as
new burden estimation methodologies and recommendations about how to
use technology and social media applications to seek comments from
those most informed about a collection's burden.
Possible distinctions, in burden estimates, between
mandatory and voluntary information collections.
Examples of information collections (if possible,
including the OMB Control Number) that inaccurately estimate the impact
of burden upon small entities.
Whether the creation of a separate burden estimate for
small entities is necessary and, if so, the best methodology by which
to estimate burden.
Whether and how burden hours should be monetized. If so,
should a single valuation of time (as represented, for example, by a
respondent's wage rate or the fee paid to a contractor) be used for all
collections, or should it be derived separately for different types of
collections? Also, should a single valuation be used for all
respondents to a particular collection, or should valuations differ
according to respondent characteristics?
Whether OMB should establish a means for reporting annual
burden estimates rather than the three-year average burden estimates
that are commonly reported today.
In submitting comments to this notice, please provide supporting
evidence where feasible--with data, specific examples of information
collections, and, if possible, the collections' OMB Control Numbers--
along with concrete recommendations.
Reducing Paperwork Burden and Maximizing the Utility of Information
Collected by the Federal Government
Over the years, the number of hours that the public has spent
responding to Federal Government information collections has been
steadily increasing. In FY 2000, the public spent an estimated 7.4
billion hours responding to information collections subject to the PRA.
In FY 2007, the number of hours grew to an estimated 9.64 billion, an
increase of more than 30 percent. Much of this increase is attributed
to factors that make it difficult for agencies to control their
paperwork burden, such as new statutory requirements and demographic
and economic changes. A much smaller portion is a result of
discretionary decisions made by agencies that increase burden.
While the overall trend in paperwork burden has been rising,
several agencies have dramatically reduced the burden of their
collections, and in some cases improved the utility of a collection in
the process. The following are examples of successful initiatives by
agencies to reduce burden on the public:
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) expanded
electronic reporting options for its National Fire Incident Reporting
System (NFIRS), which allows the Department to analyze fire incident
data at the Federal, State, and local levels. The revised system
continues to help DHS identify common fire trends on a national scale,
but in a more efficient manner. The revisions to the system resulted in
a reduction of 1.28 million burden hours and $17.545 million in costs
to respondents.
Within the Department of Health and Human Services, the
Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) managed a work
group to examine some of its forms for possible duplication or
redundancy with currently approved Standard Forms. The group found that
the health professions programs could operate with the Standard Forms,
allowing HRSA to discontinue one of its program-specific forms, the
Competing Grant Training Application. As a result, burden was reduced
by 101,531 hours.
The Social Security Administration (SSA) reduced the
amount of time necessary to complete the initial online filing for
Social Security retirement and disability benefits by enabling
respondents to sign the application electronically, rather than in hard
copy. This portion of the SSA's Signature Proxy Initiative resulted in
an annual reduction of 32,401 hours.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See page 5 of the Information Collection Budget of the
United States Government, FY 2007, Office of Management and Budget,
which can be found at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/assets/omb/inforeg/icb/fy_2007_icb_final.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agencies also often undertake efforts to improve the utility of
information that they collect through relatively small increases in
burden. For example, statistical agencies routinely pretest new surveys
or new items for existing surveys to ensure that respondents understand
the question being asked, have the information to be able to respond,
and are able to convey their response in accordance with the options
provided by the agency. Similarly, agencies conducting program
evaluations or research studies often engage in small-scale formative
or exploratory research to inform larger-scale investigations. With
increasing use of the Internet to collect and disseminate information,
more agencies are also engaging in usability testing to improve their
Web sites and electronic forms and questionnaires.
OMB is committed to helping agencies build on these initiatives and
to ensuring that the PRA is implemented in a way that suits current
conditions. OMB is also aware that concerns have been expressed about
unintended consequences of the administration of the Act, including
delays in the conduct of surveys and research in contexts in which
citizens are asked, but not required, to respond to information
collection requests by the Federal Government.
In this notice, OMB is seeking public comment to provide new ideas
for reducing paperwork burden and ensuring practical utility. As part
of its efforts to improve this situation, OMB invites comments from the
public on all issues relating to improvement of the implementation of
the PRA, including but not limited to the following topic areas:
How can OMB improve the PRA review process in a way that
increases efficiency and timeliness for agencies while ensuring
practical utility and minimizing burden on the public?
Under the PRA, what are the relevant differences among
collections that are mandatory, mandatory to receive a benefit, and
voluntary, and what practices could OMB implement in its review
processes to recognize these differences? In addition, how would such
practices achieve the PRA goals of reducing current paperwork
[[Page 55272]]
burdens and increasing the practical utility of information collected
by the Federal Government?
Should OMB encourage agencies to adopt ``one-stop''
information collection techniques, which consolidate multiple forms via
a single electronic form to reduce the burden on the public? How should
OMB encourage agencies to take advantage of online tools to simplify
the completion of already-approved surveys or mobile technology to
deliver a survey by alternative means?
What practices could OMB implement under the PRA to
facilitate the use of new technologies, such as social media, as well
as future technologies, while supporting the Federal Government's
responsibilities for Information Resource Management?
What new steps, if any, might be taken under the PRA to
eliminate any redundant or excessive mandatory information collections,
especially in connection with programs that now impose the most
significant burdens, including tax, health, and transportation
programs?
Examples of successful paperwork burden reduction
practices implemented by an agency that could be implemented by other
agencies. Please provide recommendations, and if possible, OMB control
numbers.
Cass R. Sunstein,
Administrator, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.
[FR Doc. E9-25757 Filed 10-26-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3110-01-P