FR 2021-02874

The document in question, published by the Department of Labor (DOL), invites public comments on an Information Collection Request (ICR) related to the Black Lung Benefits Act. This act is designed to assist individuals suffering from pneumoconiosis, commonly known as black lung disease, by providing financial benefits. The current document proposes collecting information from beneficiaries to ensure their continued eligibility. The collection process includes forms that facilitate electronic filing for convenience.

Overview of the Document

This notice from the DOL is part of a routine review as mandated by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The aim is to gather public feedback on the necessity and efficiency of the information being collected, specifically whether the process meets departmental needs and how it might be improved. The feedback window is set to close on March 15, 2021, during which members of the public can submit their opinions and suggestions via a specified government website.

Significant Issues and Concerns

One area of concern is the rigidity of the deadline for public comments. By setting a specific date, the DOL might inadvertently exclude valuable inputs from people who, due to unforeseen circumstances, may miss this deadline. Allowing for some flexibility could possibly lead to more comprehensive engagement from stakeholders.

The document also uses technical language and legal references that may not be easily understood by the general public. Terms such as "30 U.S.C. 901 et seq." and "20 CFR 725.513(a)" could confuse readers who are not versed in legalese, hindering full comprehension of the document's contents and implications.

Additionally, the contact information for further inquiries is not toll-free, which could present a financial burden to people seeking clarification, particularly those most affected by the black lung, who might also be economically disadvantaged.

An area lacking transparency is the cost analysis. While the notice states there are no additional costs beyond the estimated time burden, it does not include any detailed breakdown, potentially leaving questions about indirect costs unanswered.

Broad Impact on the Public

The document has the potential to impact those directly receiving black lung benefits, as well as their families. By streamlining and updating the information collection process, the DOL aims to ensure that only those eligible continue to receive benefits, maintaining the program's integrity and sustainability.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

For the beneficiaries, particularly former miners afflicted by black lung disease, the document could imply a positive change through the introduction of electronic filing options, which might simplify the process of maintaining benefits. However, for those with limited access to or understanding of digital tools, this might represent another hurdle unless supplementary support is provided.

Legal representatives and organizations advocating for miners' rights might view the document's call for comments as a positive step towards transparency and inclusiveness in federal processes. They may also have concerns, however, about the clarity and accessibility of the information being requested and may campaign for better support in understanding and completing the necessary paperwork.

In summary, while the document signals the DOL's commitment to upholding fair benefit distribution, it also highlights the need for clarity and accessibility in communications with the public. Encouraging wider participation and understanding in the comment process can bolster the effectiveness of these governmental efforts.

The section in the document under review provides important details related to the financial implications of an information collection request (ICR) submitted by the Department of Labor (DOL). This request, concerning black lung benefits, is particularly meticulous in emphasizing the financial non-burden, stating that the Total Estimated Annual Other Costs Burden is $0.

Financial Overview

The statement of zero additional costs suggests that there will be no extra financial expenditure incurred by the public in relation to this information collection. This disclosure is crucial because it implies that individuals or households affected by this data collection will not require financial outlay besides their time commitment.

Relation to Identified Issues

1. Transparency and Cost Breakdown:

While the assertion of no additional cost burden is direct, it lacks detailed explanation or breakdown. Transparency could be improved by clarifying if any hidden or incidental costs—such as time lost in filling out forms or potential technological expenses for electronic submissions—might indirectly affect respondents. The absence of further elaboration may raise questions about what constitutes "other costs" and whether indirect costs were sufficiently considered in this estimation.

1. Time Burden Considerations:

Although not directly tied to out-of-pocket financial expense, the estimated 2,810 annual burden hours represents a significant investment of time from respondents. This translation of time into potential economic impact is an essential element not addressed within the Annual Other Costs Burden stating $0. There might be an implicit financial effect, such as lost wages or productivity, as respondents allocate time to comply with this collection.

1. Accessibility Issues:

The document specifies a contact for further information, which is not a toll-free number. While there may be no direct financial burden from the forms, there might still be costs associated with inquiries due to telephone charges, especially for individuals without toll-free access. This detail, although small, highlights a missed chance for an entirely cost-neutral disclosure in terms of communication expenditures for further assistance.

In summary, while the reference to a $0 annual other costs burden is reassuring, greater specificity and explanatory detail could enhance understanding, transparency, and trust among potential respondents. This would address some of the document's broader issues, such as ensuring clarity of information and accessible communication.