FR 2021-00583

The notice from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), part of the Department of Commerce, outlines a request for public comments regarding a specific information collection. This collection is related to the Organization of Scientific Area Committees for Forensic Science (OSAC), and it's conducted under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. NIST aims to gather input to assess the impact and necessity of collecting this information, as well as to minimize the associated burden on the public.

General Overview

This notice invites the public and federal agencies to submit comments on the information collection efforts for the OSAC. The purpose is to ensure the efficient and necessary exchange of information while reducing any undue burdens for those required to respond. The document specifies that comments should be received by March 15, 2021, and highlights the application process for OSAC membership, which is done through a web-based form.

Significant Issues and Concerns

There are several issues and concerns related to this notice:

1. Legal Authority: The document lacks a clear statement of the legal authority under which the information is being collected. This omission could raise questions about the legitimacy and justification for the data collection.

2. Clarity on Automation Techniques: There is no detail on what automated collection techniques or information technology solutions might be employed to minimize the reporting burden. This absence might leave respondents unsure of potential efficiencies or improvements.

3. Defined Scope of Affected Public: The notice is vague about which specific individuals or households are considered part of the affected public. This could lead to confusion regarding who should or could respond to this notice.

4. Roles and Responsibilities: There is a lack of clarity on the specific responsibilities or roles of OSAC members, which makes understanding the practical benefits or utility of membership less clear.

5. Complexity and Jargon: The document uses technical language, such as references to accreditation bodies and forensic disciplines, which may be difficult for a non-expert audience to comprehend.

6. Privacy Concerns: Details on how personal data security will be managed through the OSAC Membership Application are missing, which may concern potential respondents about the protection of their personal information.

Impact on the Public and Stakeholders

• General Public: The call for comments invites public engagement, potentially allowing individuals to voice their opinions on the methodology or necessity of the information collection. However, unclear language and lack of detail could hinder meaningful participation.

• Potential OSAC Members: Individuals interested in contributing to forensic science standards may benefit from the opportunity to participate. However, the absence of detail on the roles and expectations might deter qualified contributors.

• Forensic Science Community: The initiative seeks to standardize forensic practices, which could lead to beneficial outcomes such as improved accuracy and reliability in forensic investigations. Yet, insufficient guidance on roles could delay or complicate these potential advances.

Conclusion

The notice is an invitation for public dialogue about data collection related to the standards in forensic science. While it seeks valuable input from the community, the lack of specificity regarding several key aspects, such as legal authority and personal data protection, may limit the effectiveness of the solicitation for comments. Further clarity and transparency could enhance participation and benefit stakeholders.

The document in question relates to a notice by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) requesting public comments on the Organization of Scientific Area Committees for Forensic Science (OSAC) Membership Application, in compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995. A noteworthy aspect of this notice is its reference to financial matters, particularly the cost implications for the public.

Estimated Total Annual Cost

Within the document, it is stated that the "Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $0." This indicates that the application process for the OSAC membership is designed not to impose any direct financial burden on the individuals or households participating. The lack of financial cost serves to encourage broad participation from potential respondents by eliminating financial barriers that might otherwise deter interested parties from engaging in the membership application process.

Financial Implications and Issues

Although the document sets the estimated cost to the public at zero, it does not address certain issues that may have indirect financial implications. For example, it outlines concerns about the lack of specific details regarding the legal authority under which the information is being collected. Clarity on the legal framework could potentially influence future financial requirements or responsibilities, depending on how the data collection is integrated into larger governmental or forensic science initiatives.

Furthermore, the document mentions that there are no costs currently associated with submitting the application, yet it lacks detail on utilizing automated collection techniques that might improve efficiency. If such techniques were adopted, there might be implications for future budget allocations to implement more sophisticated data collection technologies, thereby reducing potential indirect costs related to the time and effort required from respondents.

Conclusion

In conclusion, while the document asserts that there is no direct financial cost to the public concerning the application process, certain unresolved issues might influence future financial considerations. It is important to consider these in the broader context of administrative efficiency and legal authority to ensure that the financial impact remains negligible and transparent for the affected public. The absence of direct costs aligns with the objective of minimizing public burden, but clarity in the framework guiding this initiative might support a deeper understanding of any indirect financial considerations.