FR 2021-02634

Overview

Title

Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment Request; Claim for Medical Reimbursement Form

Agencies

ELI5 AI

The people in charge of making sure workers who get hurt at their jobs are properly taken care of are asking everyone to tell them what they think about a form that helps people get paid back for doctor visits and medicine. They want to know if the form is easy to use so they can make it better and less work for everyone.

Summary AI

The Department of Labor (DOL) is seeking public comments on continuing the use of the "Claim for Medical Reimbursement Form." This effort aims to reduce paperwork and the burden placed on respondents, in line with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The form, also known as OWCP-915, is used for claiming reimbursement for medical expenses, and the DOL wants feedback on the necessity, accuracy, and effectiveness of this information collection. Comments are accepted until April 12, 2021, and interested individuals are encouraged to submit their opinions to the DOL's Office of Workers' Compensation Programs.

Abstract

The Department of Labor (DOL) is soliciting comments concerning a proposed extension for the authority to conduct the information collection request (ICR) titled, "Claim for Medical Reimbursement Form." This comment request is part of continuing Departmental efforts to reduce paperwork and respondent burden in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA).

Type: Notice
Citation: 86 FR 8806
Document #: 2021-02634
Date:
Volume: 86
Pages: 8806-8807

AnalysisAI

The document from the Federal Register titled "Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment Request; Claim for Medical Reimbursement Form" highlights an action taken by the Department of Labor (DOL) to gather public feedback on a form used to claim medical expense reimbursements. The DOL aims to continue using the "Claim for Medical Reimbursement Form," known as OWCP-915, while simultaneously seeking ways to reduce paperwork and the burden on respondents under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

General Summary

The purpose of the document is to inform the public about the DOL's intention to extend the use of an existing information collection process. This involves soliciting comments on whether this form is necessary and useful in its current format. Such feedback is expected to aid in ensuring that the information collected is of practical utility, accurately estimated in terms of respondent burden, and streamlined in quality and clarity. The process also considers whether technological solutions could make the submission of information more efficient.

Significant Issues or Concerns

Several issues and concerns arise from the document. Firstly, while the initiative to reduce paperwork is central, there isn't much detail on what might be considered unnecessary or excessive, leading to questions about what specific improvements are being sought. The language used references several federal acts, like the Employees Compensation Act and the Black Lung Benefits Act, which may be unfamiliar and complex to general readers without additional context or explanation.

The document also utilizes technical jargon related to bureaucracy, such as "pre-clearance consultation program" and "OMB Control Number," which might not be readily accessible to the broad populace. Additionally, while estimates for the number of respondents, the time per response, and associated costs are provided, there is no clear breakdown of how these estimates were calculated, which could lead to skepticism regarding their validity.

Impact on the Public

Broadly speaking, this document's call for public participation reflects a drive towards transparency and accountability in governmental processes. By opening up the discussion on the form's usage, the DOL is actively engaging with stakeholders to ensure any decisions made are well-informed and considerate of public opinion, potentially enhancing trust and cooperation between the government and its citizens.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

For individuals or households, particularly those who frequently engage with the compensation programs cited, this document presents an opportunity to voice experiences and suggest modifications that could simplify their dealings with the government. Positive feedback might solidify the form's current processes, whereas constructive criticism could lead to meaningful changes, minimizing hassle and improving the overall experience.

Moreover, as the document invites commentary to improve efficiency through possible technological integration, it supports innovation and modernization initiatives that could reduce burdens on both individuals and administrative bodies. This aspect may particularly benefit tech-savvy users who prefer digital platforms for such activities.

Ultimately, while the effort appears to be a routine administrative refinement, the implications for stakeholders could be significant, potentially sweeping through standardized operations and influencing the very structure of claimant interactions with the Department of Labor.

Financial Assessment

The document, released by the Department of Labor (DOL), focuses on the financial impact and administrative efforts concerning the "Claim for Medical Reimbursement Form" under various workers' compensation programs. It highlights the department's drive to streamline paperwork and lessen burdens on respondents in compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

Financial Allocations and Cost Implications

A notable reference in the document concerns the Total Estimated Annual Other Cost Burden, which is cited as $59,450. This figure represents the combined, additional costs anticipated annually as a result of the administrative processes associated with the information collection efforts linked to this form. This cost burden comprises any outlays relating to processing or managing the information collected through the form but does not detail specific breakdowns or categories of expenses.

Relation to Identified Issues

The financial reference to $59,450 fits within the broader discussion of minimizing administrative burdens and costs. While the document outlines an intention to reduce paperwork and streamline processes, it acknowledges an inherent cost associated with those efforts. The estimate provided suggests a structured allocation aimed at managing information collection efficiently within the given fiscal parameters.

Despite the identified estimate, the document does not specify how this figure was derived, which poses potential questions about the methodology. The document's lack of detail about how estimated costs and response times were calculated could leave stakeholders questioning the validity and comprehensiveness of the estimates.

Moreover, by discussing costs primarily in terms of administrative burden, the document does not identify any potentially wasteful spending. Instead, it aligns financial indications with efficiency efforts, reflecting a commitment to reducing unnecessary expenditures and optimizing resources, consistent with the goals under the Paperwork Reduction Act.

Overall, the financial aspects tied to the document underscore the department's dedication to balancing necessary administrative costs with the aim of alleviating unnecessary burdens on both the agency and individuals required to comply with the information collection processes.

Issues

  • • The notice does not specify any potentially wasteful spending but focuses on reducing paperwork and respondent burden in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act.

  • • The document avoids favoritism towards any particular organizations or individuals, with a broad encouragement for public comment.

  • • Some language, such as referencing specific laws (Employees Compensation Act, Black Lung Benefits Act, Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act), might be unclear to readers unfamiliar with these laws without further context.

  • • The document contains some technical jargon related to federal laws and processes (e.g., 'pre-clearance consultation program', 'OMB approval', 'OMB Control Number') that may be complex for the general public.

  • • The document does not specify in detail how the estimated costs and average time per response were calculated, which may raise questions about the methodology.

Statistics

Size

Pages: 2
Words: 940
Sentences: 33
Entities: 58

Language

Nouns: 294
Verbs: 83
Adjectives: 49
Adverbs: 11
Numbers: 38

Complexity

Average Token Length:
5.43
Average Sentence Length:
28.48
Token Entropy:
5.24
Readability (ARI):
21.85

Reading Time

about 3 minutes