Overview
Title
Proposed Collection; Comment Request
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The Railroad Retirement Board is asking people for ideas on how to collect information in a better way, like making it easier to fill out forms to get benefits for someone who has passed away, and they want to use computers more to help with this.
Summary AI
The Railroad Retirement Board (RRB) is seeking public comments on their proposed data collection methods. They want feedback on whether the data collection is essential, the accuracy of their burden estimates, ways to improve the quality of information, and methods to reduce the burden on respondents using technology. The RRB aims to make changes to specific forms related to benefits and claims but also proposes to keep some forms unchanged. People can send comments or request further information from Brian Foster at the RRB.
Abstract
In accordance with the requirement of section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 which provides opportunity for public comment on new or revised data collections, the Railroad Retirement Board (RRB) will publish periodic summaries of proposed data collections. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed information collection is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information has practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the RRB's estimate of the burden of the collection of the information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden related to the collection of information on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. 1. Title and purpose of information collection: Application for Benefits Due But Unpaid at Death; OMB 3220-0055. Under Section 2(g) of the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act (45 U.S.C. 352), benefits that accrued but were not paid because of the death of the employee shall be paid to the same individual(s) to whom benefits are payable under section 6(a)(1) of the Railroad Retirement Act. The provisions relating to the payment of such benefits are prescribed in 20 CFR 325.5 and 20 CFR 335.5. The RRB provides Form UI-63, Application for Benefits Due But Unpaid at Death, to those applying for the accrued sickness or unemployment benefits unpaid at the death of the employee and for obtaining the information needed to identify the proper payee. One response is requested of each respondent. Completion is required to obtain a benefit. The RRB proposes the following changes to Form UI-63:
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The document from the Railroad Retirement Board (RRB) is an official request for public comments regarding proposed changes to their data collection methods concerning certain benefits and claims. The RRB seeks input on the necessity and practicality of these collections, the accuracy of their burden estimates, potential enhancements in information quality, and ways to minimize the respondent burden through technology. The document outlines proposed changes to specific forms related to benefits due to death, employee certification, and the claims notification system under the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act (RUIA).
General Summary
The RRB aims to refine its data collection processes relating to benefits and claims. This includes updating specific forms, such as the Application for Benefits Due But Unpaid at Death (Form UI-63), Employee’s Certification (Form G-346), and forms associated with the RUIA claims notification system. The proposed updates involve both minor adjustments and maintenance of current practices and are intended to improve the efficiency and reliability of the information collected. The RRB invites the public to provide feedback within 60 days of the notice’s publication.
Significant Issues and Concerns
A primary concern is the document’s use of technical terminology without adequate explanation, which could make it challenging for readers unfamiliar with terms like "Electronic Data Interchange (EDI)" and "Employer Reporting System (ERS)." This lack of clarity extends to legal references within the document, which may not be easily understood by a lay audience. Additionally, the changes proposed do not include sufficient detail about the potential impacts on respondents, leaving many implications unexplored. The estimated burden for respondents is provided, but it does not specify whether this represents a change from previous figures, which could be useful for understanding trends in administrative efficiency.
Broad Public Impact
For the general public, particularly those involved in the railroad industry or eligible for related benefits, the proposed changes have the potential to streamline benefit claims processes and enhance the overall experience. However, without clear communication and understanding of the changes, respondents may find themselves navigating bureaucratic procedures that remain complex and time-consuming.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Specific stakeholders, such as railroad employees and employers, may experience varying impacts. For employees, updated and more efficient forms could mean quicker processing times for unpaid benefits at death or annuities for spouses. Conversely, if the changes promised in the form updates are not sufficiently impactful or communicated, stakeholders may see little practical benefit. Employers receiving notices about claims will need to adapt to any new processes introduced by the revised forms, but the mode of delivery and response options appear to remain flexible.
In conclusion, while the document reflects the RRB’s efforts to improve its administrative processes, its effectiveness will significantly depend on clear communication of changes and comprehensive guidance for stakeholders. Providing more context around technical terms and potential impacts would likely enhance the transparency and usability of these proposed updates.
Issues
• The document uses technical terms such as 'Electronic Data Interchange (EDI)' and 'Employer Reporting System (ERS)' without explanation or context for unfamiliar readers, which could make it difficult to understand for those not familiar with these terms.
• The estimate of the annual respondent burden includes categories such as 'FTP' but lacks a detailed explanation, potentially leading to ambiguity regarding the process and requirements.
• The text includes complex legal references such as 'Section 2(g) of the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act (45 U.S.C. 352)' and '20 CFR 325.5 and 20 CFR 335.5', which might be difficult for lay readers to comprehend without additional context or explanation.
• The document describes a change on the cover letter regarding the use of 'his or her' to 'their' but does not provide the actual cover letter text, which might leave readers without a clear understanding of the change.
• The document does not provide sufficient information on how the proposed changes to Form UI-63 are expected to impact respondents, leaving potential implications unexplored.
• The title 'Proposed Collection; Comment Request' is vague, and doesn't immediately convey the specific purpose or scope of the document to the reader.
• The document lists burden hours without contextualizing whether these burdens have been reduced or increased compared to previous years, making it difficult to assess potential improvements or regressions in administrative efficiency.
• Comments are invited but recipients are not given explicit guidance on the preferred format for submissions, potentially leading to inconsistent feedback.
• The section on 'Estimate of Annual Respondent Burden' uses formatting that is inconsistent (for example, 'Time' and 'Burden' are explained in an unclear way, mixing minutes and hours without consistent labeling), which could lead to misunderstandings.