FR 2024-28585

The document in question is issued by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), a branch of the Department of Energy. It seeks public input on the proposed extension of the "Generic Clearance for Questionnaire Testing, Evaluation, and Research" for an additional three years. This initiative, regulated under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, is aimed at enhancing the quality of data collected through various survey methods conducted by the EIA.

General Summary

The primary goal of this document is to solicit public comments regarding the extension of a clearance that enables the EIA to conduct critical activities such as testing and refining survey questionnaires. This process involves employing methodologies like pilot surveys, cognitive interviews, usability testing, focus groups, and behavior coding to ensure accurate data collection. The EIA also invites suggestions on reducing the burden on survey respondents and improving data quality and clarity.

Significant Issues

There are several concerns regarding the complexity and transparency of the document. The language used is quite technical, which might make it challenging for a layperson to understand terms such as "cognitive interviews" and "usability testing." Additionally, while the document outlines the estimated cost per burden hour, it fails to explain how the rate of $91.16 was calculated. Clarification on this point would contribute to a better understanding of the projection. Furthermore, it remains unclear what specific changes are being proposed under the "Proposed Changes to Information Collection," which adds an element of ambiguity to the process. Moreover, the distribution of the estimated 7,500 burden hours across various activities is not detailed, leaving room for questions about the validity of this estimate.

The usage and protection of personally identifiable information (PII) is another concern. The document explains that PII will be necessary to recruit participants and handle remunerations but does not clearly outline the protocols for safeguarding this data or how long it will be retained.

Public Impact

The outcome of this collection extension could broadly impact entities that interact with the EIA's data collection processes, including federal agencies, local governments, the energy industry, researchers, and the general public. By improving the efficiency and accuracy of EIA surveys, the initiative could lead to better-informed energy policies and planning resources at various levels of government and industry.

Stakeholder Impact

Positive Impacts:
For stakeholders like researchers and policy developers, the extension of this clearance can lead to higher-quality data, enabling more efficient and effective policy formulation and analysis. The methodologies proposed for data collection testing are designed to reduce errors and respondent burden, which could lead to more reliable data outputs.

Negative Impacts:
Respondents to the surveys could face additional burdens if the methodologies are not optimized. Inadequate transparency about how respondent data is protected and utilized can result in privacy concerns. Additionally, stakeholders interested in understanding the cost implications may find the lack of clarity around cost estimates troubling.

Overall, the proposal by EIA holds significant potential for advancing data collection strategies in the energy sector, but would benefit from enhanced clarity and accessibility to allow all stakeholders to provide informed feedback on the proposed changes.

The document outlines a proposal by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) regarding the extension and modification of the Generic Clearance for Questionnaire Testing, Evaluation, and Research. This proposal includes detailed financial implications related to the information collection process.

Financial Summary

The document provides specific figures related to the anticipated costs and burden of the proposed activities:

• Annual Estimated Number of Respondents: 7,500
• Annual Estimated Number of Total Responses: 7,500
• Annual Estimated Number of Burden Hours: 7,500
• Annual Estimated Reporting and Recordkeeping Cost Burden: $683,700 (calculated as 7,500 annual burden hours multiplied by $91.16 per hour)

These figures illustrate the expected financial and time commitments required from respondents who participate in the testing and research processes under this clearance.

Financial Allocations and Identified Issues

One notable issue is the lack of clarity in how the $91.16 per hour cost for the burden hours was determined. This rate significantly affects the overall cost burden estimation of $683,700. Without transparency regarding the constituents of this hourly rate, such as whether it includes labor costs, administrative expenses, or other factors, stakeholders might find it challenging to assess the fairness or accuracy of these financial projections.

Moreover, the estimated burden hours imply a direct relationship between the number of respondents and the overall costs incurred by them. However, the document does not provide detailed insight into how these hours are distributed among various activities like cognitive interviews or usability testing. This lack of detailed breakdown impedes a comprehensive understanding of the cost-effectiveness and efficiency of the proposed methodologies.

In addition, while the document mentions collecting personally identifiable information (PII) for participant recruitment and remuneration, it lacks specificity regarding the duration and security measures for retaining this information. This omission could raise concerns about data protection costs and liabilities, though these are not directly quantified in the financial statement provided.

By addressing these financial and procedural ambiguities, the EIA can enhance transparency and stakeholder confidence, aiding more informed public commentary and participation in the feedback process.