FR 2021-00928

The document at hand outlines a request by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) for public comments regarding the National Medal of Technology and Innovation Nomination Application. This call for input is in line with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, aimed at evaluating the necessity, efficiency, and clarity of the existing information collection process.

General Summary

The USPTO is collecting feedback on an application process used to nominate individuals or organizations for the National Medal of Technology and Innovation. This high honor, bestowed by the President of the United States, acknowledges exemplary technological achievement and innovation. The document details how the nominations are reviewed, the expected time commitment for applicants, and the lack of any associated financial burden for respondents. Public comments will help refine and potentially enhance the process of collecting this information before submitting it for approval to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

Significant Issues and Concerns

Several key concerns emerge from the document:

• Cost Breakdown: While the document notes an estimated yearly cost of $97,140 for respondents, it lacks clarity on how this figure is calculated. A detailed breakdown would aid in understanding the financial implications more comprehensively.

• Rate Calculation: The document presents different hourly rates for professions likely to fill out the application but doesn't explain how these individual rates combine into the cited average hourly rate of $48.57.

• Complex Language: Some sections, notably the description of the National Medal, use complex language, which might be simplified to improve readability and accessibility for a broader audience.

• Data Confidentiality: Although the document provides guidance on what not to submit, it lacks clear measures or strategies to safeguard sensitive information submitted by respondents.

• Process Transparency: A better explanation of how public comments will influence the final decisions on the application process would enhance transparency and encourage greater public participation.

Impact on the Public

The potential impact on the public revolves around encouraging broader participation in nominating deserving candidates for this prestigious award. By simplifying the process and clarifying associated burdens and benefits, more individuals and organizations might engage, fostering wider recognition of technological achievements across the nation.

Impact on Stakeholders

Specific stakeholders, such as academic professionals, civil engineers, and research managers, are pointed out as likely respondents. The document implies that higher engagement from these groups could channel their professional insights into recognizing impactful innovations. However, the estimated time commitment of 40 hours per response represents a substantial investment. Without clear incentives or streamlined processes, some potential nominators might be dissuaded from participation.

In conclusion, while the effort to solicit public feedback on the information collection process is an encouraging move towards inclusivity and refinement, addressing the highlighted issues could significantly enhance the overall effectiveness and reception of the program. Balancing transparency, accessibility, and thoroughness will be key to achieving a more impactful application process.

The document addresses the costs associated with the information collection necessary for the National Medal of Technology and Innovation Nomination Application, as prepared by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).

Summary of Financial References

The document outlines an estimated total annual respondent hourly cost burden of $97,140. This cost pertains to the effort and time invested by individuals or organizations in preparing and submitting nomination applications. The estimation includes the anticipated number of hours respondents will spend on the task and the average hourly rate of the individuals undertaking it.

Additionally, the document specifies that there is no estimated total annual (non-hour) respondent cost burden, meaning no further costs like filing fees or operational expenses are expected for this process. This suggests that respondents will not incur costs beyond their time investment.

Explanation of Financial Calculations

The document estimates that the task will take approximately 40 hours per response. With an estimated 50 responses per year, this results in a comprehensive annual burden of 2,000 hours. Considering the total annual respondent hourly cost burden is $97,140, the average hourly cost can be deduced as follows:

• The calculation of the average hourly rate is $48.57, which seems to be derived from professional rates set forth by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. These rates are specified for various occupations, including professors and research managers.

Identified Issues Related to Financial References

One of the highlighted issues is the lack of a clear breakdown of how the $97,140 was derived. Although hourly rates for different professions are provided—ranging from $33.75 to $61.28—the document does not explicitly explain how these figures combine to produce the average $48.57 rate. This creates some ambiguity, particularly since a straightforward average of the given rates results in a different figure.

Moreover, while the document addresses potential burden costs in terms of time, it does not explicitly mention specific protocols for safeguarding confidential information that may accompany submissions. Understanding how public comments on these financial burdens will influence decision-making is also not detailed, which could enhance transparency regarding how such feedback might affect future financial assessments.

In summary, while the document provides overall estimates of time and cost burdens associated with the nomination process, a more detailed exposition on calculation methodologies and the use of public comments could enhance clarity and understanding for involved stakeholders.