25004 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 83 / Friday, April 28, 2000 / Notices

Commission’s Public Document Room,

the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street,

NW., Washington, DC. Publically

available records will be accessible

electronically from the Agencywide

Documents Access and Management

System (ADAMS) Public Library

component of the NRC Web site, <http:/

/www.nrc.gov> (the Electronic Reading

Room).

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 25th day

of April 2000.

For the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission.

Jacob I. Zimmerman,

Project Manager, Section 2, Project

Directorate I, Division of Licensing Project

Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation.

[FR Doc. 00–10664 Filed 4–27–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[NUREG–1702, Final Report]

Standard Review Plan for the Review

of a License Application for the Tank

Waste Remediation System

Privatization Project: Notice of

Availability

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory

Commission.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC) is announcing the

completion and availability of NUREG–

1702, Final Report, entitled ‘‘Standard

Review Plan for the Review of a License

Application for the Tank Waste

Remediation System Privatization

(TWRS–P) Project.’’

ADDRESSES: Copies of NUREG–1702,

Final Report, may be obtained by

writing to the Superintendent of

Documents, U.S. Government Printing

Office, P.O. Box 37082, Washington, DC

20402–9328. Copies are also available

from the National Technical Information

Service, 5285 Port Royal Road,

Springfield, Virginia 22161. A copy of

the document is available for inspection

and/or copying for a fee in the NRC

Public Document Room, 2120 L Street,

NW (lower level), Washington, DC

20555–0001. A copy is also posted on

the NRC’s internet web site at http://

www.nrc.gov/NRC/NUREGS/

indexnum.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Michael Tokar, Division of Fuel Cycle

Safety and Safeguards, Office of Nuclear

Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Washington, DC 20555–0001.

Telephone: (301) 415–7251.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March

19, 1999 (64 FR 13613), NRC announced

the availability of draft NUREG–1702,

‘‘Standard Review Plan for the Review

of a License Application for the Tank

Waste Remediation System Privatization

(TWRS–P) Project,’’ and requested

comments on it. This draft NUREG

report was the first specific guidance

developed for the NRC staff to review a

possible future license application for

immobilizing highly radioactive waste

in underground tanks at the Department

of Energy (DOE) reservation in Hanford,

Washington.

If NRC were to receive a license

application for a TWRS–P facility, it is

anticipated that the application would

be reviewed under 10 CFR part 70,

Domestic Licensing of Special Nuclear

Material. The NRC is currently

considering revisions to 10 CFR part 70

and the associated standard review plan

(SRP), draft NUREG–1520, ‘‘Standard

Review Plan for the Review of a License

Application for a Fuel Cycle Facility,’’

(see http://techconf.llnl.gov/cgi_bin/

topics). To provide facility specific

guidance for the review of a license

application for a TWRS–P facility, the

NRC simultaneously developed

NUREG–1702.

At the present time, NRC is assisting

DOE in developing an effective

regulatory program for proposed

licensing of a TWRS–P facility. NRC and

DOE interactions during this initial

phase are governed by a Memorandum

of Understanding (MOU) signed January

1997. This MOU is currently undergoing

revision.

NRC staff considered all public

comments received in the preparation of

the final NUREG report.

The final version of NUREG–1702, is

now available for use by applicants,

NRC license reviewers, and other NRC

staff. This ‘‘standard review plan,’’

(SRP) provides guidance for the

evaluation of health, safety, and

environmental protection in a license

application. Its principal purpose is to

ensure quality and uniformity of staff

reviews of the application and any later

amendments to the license. In addition,

it provides information about review

acceptance criteria to interested

members of the public and the regulated

industry. Each SRP section addresses

the regulations pertinent to specific

technical matters, the acceptance

criteria used by the staff, how the

review is accomplished, and the

conclusions that are appropriate for the

Safety Evaluation Report.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 31st day

of January 2000.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Michael F. Weber,

Director, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and

Safeguards, NMSS.

[FR Doc. 00–10661 Filed 4–27–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND

BUDGET

Information Initiative ‘‘Collecting

Information in the Information Age’’

AGENCY: Office of Management and

Budget, Executive Office of the

President.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Office of Information and

Regulatory Affairs within the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB), with

help from a group of Federal agencies,

is beginning an initiative to examine

how agencies can collect information

more effectively and efficiently. The

initiative will focus on improving the

quality of information agencies collect

while minimizing the collection burden,

particularly through the use of

information technology. Eight Federal

agencies are participating in the

initiative: the Internal Revenue Service

(IRS), the Occupational Health and

Safety Administration (OSHA) of the

Department of Labor, the Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA), the

Department of Transportation (DOT),

the Health Care Financing

Administration (HCFA) of the

Department of Health and Human

Services (HHS), the Department of

Agriculture (USDA), the Student

Financial Assistance Agency of the

Department of Education (ED), and the

Small Business Administration (SBA).

The initiative will begin with a public

Forum on April 27, 2000. Through a

series of Roundtables with stakeholders,

each agency will explore ways to

improve the quality of data collected,

disseminate better information to the

public, and reduce burden. The dates,

topic and discussion questions for each

Roundtable are in the Supplementary

Information below. OMB is seeking

written or electronic comments from

members of the public on the topics and

discussion questions. The procedure for

submitting comments is in Dates and

Addresses below. At a second Forum

and in a final report, OIRA will compile

the comments received, present the

results of the roundtable discussions

regarding specific and overall agency

collection efforts, and recommend

opportunities for further progress in

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 83 / Friday, April 28, 2000 / Notices 25005

information management and burden

reduction.

DATES AND ADDRESSES: The first Forum

will be on April 27 in Room 450 of the

Eisenhower Executive Office Building

(EEOB), Pennsylvania Avenue,

Washington, D.C. Roundtables will be

held on April 27 and other dates,

including April 28, and May 5, 8, 10,

and 11. There will be morning and

afternoon Roundtables on April 27.

Roundtables will be held in the New

Executive Office Building, 725 17th

Street, NW., and the Indian Treaty

Room, EEOB, Washington, DC. Because

space may be limited for specific

roundtables, OMB recommends that

those wishing to participate pre-register

to ensure that they can participate in the

sessions of their choice. Registration

procedures are in the Supplemental

Information below. Those not registered

will be accommodated as space and

time permit. The second forum will be

held approximately 90 days after the

first Forum.

Written and electronic comments

must be received by June 12, 2000. DOT

has established an electronic docket at

http://dms.dot.gov/ to receive electronic

comments. OMB encourages members of

the public to submit electronic

comments to that site. When you access

the site, click on ES Submit. Then click

on unregistered user submission. You

will see a document submission sheet.

Fill in the data elements for submitter,

docket ID, operating administration, and

document title. The docket ID is 7156.

The operating administration (use pulldown window) is OMB. The document

title corresponds to a Roundtable and is

one of the following:

• ED—Electronic Documentation

• EPA—TRI;

• EPA—RCRA;

• EPA—TSCA;

• EPA—Air;

• HCFA—CMNs;

• HCFA—Provider Enrollment;

• IRS—Self Employed;

• IRS—Employment Tax;

• IRS—Post Filing Burden;

• OSHA—Certifications;

• USDA—SCI.

Type the document title exactly as

written here. Then click ‘‘enter

comment’’ and type in your comment

on screen, or click on attach to attach a

file. Click on Help for acceptable file

formats. Submit written comments to

DOT Dockets, 400 7th St. SW., PL401,

Washington, DC 20590. Include the

docket ID (7156) and the document title

at the top of your comment (for

example: docket 7156, HCFA – CMN).

Submit comments by fax to 202–493–

2251.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

further information contact Ronald F.

Matzner, Office of Information and

Regulatory Affairs, Office of

Management and Budget, Room 10202,

New Executive Office Building,

Washington, DC, 20503. Telephone:

(202) 395–4856 or at

rmatzner@omb.eop.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA)

requires OMB to oversee the

information collection activities of

Federal agencies. Among the purposes

of the PRA are to improve data quality,

program efficiency, and delivery of

services to the public, while minimizing

information collection burdens. OMB is

charged with responsibility to work

with agencies to make their information

collections more effective and efficient.

To this end, OMB, with help from

Federal regulatory agencies, has begun

an initiative to examine how agencies

can collect information more effectively

and efficiently.

Each of the participating agencies will

hold a series of roundtables or dialogue

sessions with stakeholders. In each

Roundtable session, the agency chairing

the session will ask participants to

address specific topics and issues with

respect to a particular information

collection or the agency’s information

collection efforts in general. The

participating agencies have chosen

information collections and topics that

illustrate current agency practices or

highlight issues common to government

in general. Agencies will use the input

and dialogue from stakeholders in their

decision making regarding the specific

collection initiatives and generally in

their efforts to improve data quality,

gather and disseminate better

information, and reduce burden. OMB

will consider the input from

stakeholders and the agency responses

in its final report. OMB expects that the

roundtables will focus on best

information collection practices and

new uses of technology to help

government balance the need for

information with the minimization of

burden. Special attention may focus on

the use of information technology to

change significantly the way

government obtains information. OMB

also expects that agencies may discuss

efforts to share information across

programs, agencies, and Departments.

The initiative will begin with a public

Forum on April 27, 2000, consisting of

presentations by senior agency officials

and Roundtables. Agency officials first

will discuss burden reduction

accomplishments to date and current

agency initiatives to improve data

quality and reduce collection burden.

Most participating agencies will then

host Roundtable sessions. The IRS will

have additional roundtables on May 8

and 11. EPA and HCFA will have

Roundtables on April 28 and May 10

respectively.

As of April 4, the following

Roundtables have been scheduled:

• EPA—TSCA Electronic Reporting

(April 27, 10:30–12:30);

• EPA—RCRA Burden Reduction

(April 27, 2–4:30);

• EPA—TRI Certification in Lieu of

Full Reporting (April 28, 10–12:30);

• EPA—Consolidated Emissions

Reporting and Consolidated Federal Air

Rules (April 28, 2–4:30);

• HCFA—Certificates of Medical

Necessity for DMEs (April 27, all day);

• HCFA—Provider Enrollment (May

10, all day);

• IRS—Self Employed Tax Burden

(April 27, all day);

• IRS—Employment Tax Burden

(May 8, all day);

• IRS—Post Filing Burden (May 11,

all day);

• OSHA—Certifying Regulatory

Compliance (April 27, 10:30–12:30);

• USDA—Service Center Initiative

(April 27, 10:30–12:30);

The following is a detailed

description of the information

collections, topics, issues and questions

that will be discussed at each

roundtable, arranged in chronological

order.

There will be five roundtables on

April 27 from 10:30 to 12:30.

EPA—RCRA Streamlining

The Office of Solid Waste (OSW)

reviewed all of its RCRA reporting and

recordkeeping requirements. It is

considering streamlining or eliminating

many of them, which could reduce the

information collection burden of the

program by up to 40%. The key issues

to discuss are:

(1) Eliminating or streamlining one

third of the 334 notices and reports that

facilities send to states or EPA.

(2) Eliminating or streamlining four

reporting requirements for the Land

Disposal Restrictions Program.

(3) Reducing the frequency of facility

self-inspections for hazardous waste

tanks from daily to weekly and reducing

inspection frequencies for all other

treatment units on a case-by-case basis.

(4) Deferring to the OSHA standards

for facility emergency response training.

(5) Allowing electronic recordkeeping

and reporting.

25006 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 83 / Friday, April 28, 2000 / Notices

HCFA—Certificates of Medical

Necessity (CMN) for DMEs

HCFA has published a notice in the

Federal Register announcing the

agency’s review of all CMNs (except for

oxygen). It is extending the comment

period until June 1, 2000 to receive

additional input in the Information

Initiative. HCFA hopes the roundtable

will result in useful information to help

it improve the design and

administration of CMNs. Key issues are:

(1) Practical experience with DMERCs

in processing CMNs; (2) the elimination

or addition of data elements (Is HCFA

collecting the correct information?); (3)

the utility of CMN information; (4) the

clarity of CMN questions; (5)

information technology that can make

the collections more efficient and

effective; (6) present burden (complexity

and time); and (7) reengineering the

process (such as getting the physician’s

signature, ICD–9 codes).

IRS—Self-Employed Tax Burden

Approximately one million new small

businesses start up each year. Currently,

about 10 million Americans are selfemployed full time. This number will

continue to climb as information

technology changes the way Americans

do their work. IRS is reinventing itself

to better adapt its services to meet the

needs of this dynamic taxpayer segment.

In general, the self-employed taxpayer

population has substantially higher

income and files up to three to four

times the number of forms and

schedules as wage and investment

taxpayers. A majority of self-employed

taxpayers (about 88 percent) rely on tax

professionals to prepare their income

tax forms. Many are savvy

technologically—about 65 percent use

the World Wide Web to access the

Internet. On the other hand, many of the

self-employed do not understand tax

law requirements, rely on inadequate

accounting practices, and struggle with

resource and cash flow problems. This

roundtable discussion, therefore, will

focus on what can be done to help the

self-employed comply with tax law

requirements while decreasing the

amount of time and out-of-pocket costs

(burden) these individuals face in

preparing and filing their Federal

income tax return.

Specific issues to be discussed during

this roundtable are:

Identifying Self-Employed Burden

• Is the burden of preparing and filing

Federal income tax returns greater on

the self-employed taxpayer than on

wage and investment taxpayers?

• What are the specific burdens on

the self-employed taxpayer?

• Are any of these elements unique to

the self-employed taxpayer?

• Identify specific legislative

provisions that may cause unnecessary

burden on self-employed taxpayers.

• Identify specific elements in IRS

procedures and processes that are

affecting the most self-employed

taxpayers? What processes are costing

self-employed taxpayers the most

money?

• Identify specific elements in IRS

forms and publications that may cause

unnecessary burden on self-employed

taxpayers.

Process and Form Redesign To Reduce

Burden

• Are there any legislation or

regulatory changes that would decrease

burden?

• Are there any changes in IRS

processes and processes that would

decrease burden without impacting

compliance?

• Are there any changes in forms and

publications that would decrease

burden?

• What education/outreach efforts are

working and what additional efforts are

needed to improve self-employed

individuals’ knowledge of what their

responsibility is for filing taxes?

• Are there joint efforts with third

parties that could solidify better

relations between IRS and the selfemployed?

The Role of Tax Professionals in

Reducing Burden

• Many self-employed individuals

turn to tax professionals to prepare and

file their Federal income tax return.

What is the role of the tax preparer

today? How has this role changed in

recent years?

• What special benefits do tax

professionals afford the self-employed

individual?

• What role may tax professionals

play in the future that will help reduce

self-employed tax burden?

Technology Issues

Off-the-shelf tax software packages

provide self-employed individuals with

powerful tools to assist them in

preparing and filing their federal

income tax returns. But many selfemployed individuals do not take

advantage of these tools.

• Are there barriers, that IRS can

control, that keep self-employed

individuals from optimizing their use of

tax preparation software?

• What can IRS do to eliminate these

barriers?

• How effective have other electronic

tools, such as e-filing, been in reducing

self-employed tax burden.

• How can information technology be

best utilized to reduce self-employed tax

preparation and filing burden?

• What policies, business prophecies,

and procedures might the IRS change to

maximize the benefits of information

technology?

• Are there any legislative or

regulatory changes needed to optimize

the use of technology?

• How can IRS make better use of its

Web site for burden reduction?

• What education/outreach is

necessary?

OSHA—Certifying Regulatory

Compliance

OSHA has reviewed all of its rules

and regulations to identify existing

information collection requirements,

including certification records. After

conducting this review, OSHA

identified a number of existing

provisions in the General Industry,

Shipyard Employment, and

Construction industry standards which

require employers to prepare a

certification record to demonstrate

regulatory compliance. Employers must

prepare and maintain documents

confirming that they completed required

activities, including: inspecting, testing,

and checking equipment; assessing and

controlling safety and health hazards;

and training employees. OSHA is

considering the possibility of revoking

some or all of the certification records

if it would reduce unnecessary

paperwork without diminishing

employee protection. OSHA has had

discussions with the National Advisory

Committee on Occupational Safety and

Health, the Advisory Committee on

Construction Safety and Health, and the

Maritime Advisory Committee on

Occupational Safety and Health about

the certification records. As part of this

forum, OSHA will discuss the

recommendations and comment from

those Committees and seek input from

attendees. The discussion will focus on

the following questions:

(1) Should OSHA eliminate some or

all of the certification requirements? If

so, which?

(2) How much burden reduction will

result from the elimination of

certification records?

(3) How will employers demonstrate

to OSHA that they have complied with

a regulatory provision if a certification

record is not required?

(4) Will employers forego the required

inspections, tests, assessments or

training if OSHA does not require

written documentation to certify

completion of these activities?

(5) Should OSHA retain any specific

certification requirements?

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 83 / Friday, April 28, 2000 / Notices 25007

(6) Are any existing certification

requirements useful to employers for

purposes other than documenting

compliance with an OSHA standard?

(7) What alternatives to certification

are available that employers could use

to demonstrate compliance with the

required activities (e.g., equipment

testing, employee training)?

(8) If certification requirements are

revoked, what would be the effect on

employee protection?

(9) Are there other paperwork

requirements the Agency could

eliminate without jeopardizing the

safety and health of workers?

(10) Are there any paperwork

requirements that hinder employers

from using the latest technology to

reduce the paperwork burden?

(11) Are there ways to modify existing

paperwork requirements that could

reduce burden? For example, modifying

the frequency of the collection, the

contents, or identification of areas of

duplication?

(12) Are there services or products the

Agency could provide to make it easier

to comply with paperwork

requirements?

USDA—Service Center Initiative (SCI)

SCI is an effort by USDA’s countybased agencies, the Farm Service

Agency, Natural Resources Conservation

Service and Rural Development to

provide one-stop service for farm

programs and farm credit, conservation

programs, and rural loans and grants. It

would allow customers to conduct

business, and submit and receive

information without visiting a service

center. It also would integrate service

delivery with that provided by other

service providers in the community.

The effort will reduce burden by sharing

information, eliminating redundancy,

reengineering business processes, and

reducing office visits and paperwork.

Key issues for discussions are building

common business and technical

architectures; business process

reengineering; eliminating redundancy;

sharing customer information; privacy

and security; and pilot site status.

Discussion Topics will include:

1. Are these needs and expectations

the right improvements for USDA to

target?

2. What service delivery methods

used successfully by other public or

private enterprises can and should

USDA follow?

3. Will providing information and

delivering services through the Internet

and e-mail be a useful alternative to

visiting a service center?

4. What privacy concerns arise from

USDA consolidating information from

the three agencies onto single computer

systems?

5. Given existing budget realities, how

should USDA best assist and train staff

and customers to empower them to use

the Internet and USDA Internet-based

services?

6. How should USDA measure

success in delivering these services over

the Internet?

There will be four Roundtables on

April 27 from 2:00 to 4:30.

EPA—Electronic Reporting, Focusing

on TSCA

EPA’s Office of Prevention, Pesticides,

and Toxic Substances has developed

electronic technology initiatives for

reporting under sections 4, 5, 8(c), 8(d),

8(e), and 12(b) of the Toxic Substances

Control Act (TSCA). They also will be

used for reporting to the Interagency

Testing Committee (ITC), an

independent advisory committee to the

EPA Administrator that includes 15 U.S.

Government organizations. These

initiatives use state of the art

technologies such as public key

infrastructure (PKI) to digitally sign

submissions, and portable document

format (PDF) and hypertext mark up

language (HTML) to submit reports to

the EPA over the Internet or on compact

discs.

EPA would like to discuss the

following with stakeholders:

(1) Does the approach do what EPA

intends it to do (i.e. make it easier to

use, reduce errors, improve tracking,

satisfy company needs)?

(2) What do they think about the

system and forms used (i.e., user

friendly, help menus, easy to follow,

instructions, related guidance)?

(3) Would companies use this

optional electronic reporting approach?

Why? Why not?

(4) Are incentives available to

encourage electronic submission of

TSCA data?

(5) How should the Agency measure

and account for the burden related to

electronic submissions like these? How

should the Agency measure and account

for other benefits related to this

electronic approach, i.e., increased

efficiencies for the regulated

community, as well as within EPA?

(6) Can EPA reduce related burden

further?

(7) Are there other reporting or

submission requirements within OPPTS

where this approach would help to

significantly reduce burden?

(8) Are there new ways to report

electronically that OPPTS should

consider?

HCFA—CMNs Continues

IRS—Self-Employed Tax Burden

Continues

USDA–SUSDA—Service Center

Initiative Continues

EPA will have two half-day

Roundtables on April 28, one on TRI

and the other on Consolidated Air

Emissions and Consolidated Federal Air

Rules.

EPA—TRI Certification of No

Significant Change From Prior Year

The Toxics Release Inventory is a

publicly available EPA database that

contains information on specific toxic

chemical releases and other waste

management activities reported

annually by facilities in certain industry

sectors. A suggestion has been made

that some of the facilities that file a

Form R should have the option to file

a ‘‘Certification of No Material Change’’

in lieu of Form R in alternate years. EPA

would like to discuss this suggestion

with interested parties. Key issues are:

(1) What qualitative conditions would

a facility need to certify had not

changed (inputs, production processes,

production levels, and waste

management practices)?

(2) How much is a ‘‘material change’’

with respect to each qualifying

condition?

(3) Should there be a quantitative

certification with respect to either total

releases or distribution of releases

among media?

(4) If a quantitative certification were

needed, what would be a simple,

verifiable standard? (For example,

eligibility could be limited to facilities

that did not have more than an X%

change in their reported quantities over

the past two or three years.)

(5) How much burden reduction

would certification yield?

EPA—Consolidated Emissions

Reporting and Consolidated Federal

Air Rules

A. Regulated facilities submit air

pollutant emissions data to the state

governments that submit the data to

EPA. EPA is considering a Consolidated

Emissions Reporting Rule (CERR) to

simplify emissions reporting, unify

reporting dates, streamline the way

states submit this data to EPA,

consolidate and harmonize reporting

requirements, improve data quality, and

minimize overall reporting burden. Key

issues for discussion are:

(1) Whether EPA can streamline or

simplify the requirements further.

(2) Whether EPA should apply the

same streamlining and simplification to

new categories of data the Agency needs

25008 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 83 / Friday, April 28, 2000 / Notices

to collect to support its programs to

control fine particles and ozone.

(3) Whether EPA should add

hazardous air pollutants to the

categories of pollutants for which state

reporting is required.

B. Consolidated Federal Air Rule.

EPA is also in the final stages of

developing a ‘‘one-stop’’ air pollution

regulation for the chemical industry.

Called the Consolidated Federal Air

Rule, this regulation, the first of its kind,

will combine all existing air regulations

affecting the synthetic organic chemical

industry into one streamlined and

simplified rule, eliminating duplication

and substantially reducing paperwork

burden. EPA and the affected industry

entered into the process with hopes that

the effort could be a model for the

consolidation of air rules affecting other

industry sectors. EPA and the synthetic

organic chemical industry expended an

enormous amount of effort and

resources developing the rule. The

experience has been mixed. While the

rule does simplify and reduce

paperwork, the effort was so resource

intensive and the issues so complex that

it calls into question whether it is a

useful model for other industries. At the

Roundtable, EPA will briefly describe

how this new concept works, and will

invite discussion whether the concept is

likely to prove useful for other

industries.

On May 8, the IRS Will Have a Full Day

Roundtable on Employment Tax

Burden

This roundtable discussion will focus

on the burden faced by small businesses

and self-employed individuals in

preparing and filing their Federal

employment tax return. The process of

completing IRS Form 941 (Federal

Employment Tax Return) is by itself not

a major source of burden for small

businesses—it’s only one page. The real

burden is derived from the day-to-day

activities, such as completing

calculations and record keeping, that

supply the numbers needed to fill out

the form.

The issues to be discussed during this

roundtable session are:

Identifying the Issues

• What are the specific elements of

burden associated with preparing and

filing Federal employment tax returns?

• Identify specific legislative

provisions that may cause unnecessary

burden on small businesses and selfemployed taxpayers preparing and filing

their employment tax return.

• Identify specific elements in IRS

procedures and processes that may

cause unnecessary burden.

• Identify specific elements in IRS

forms and publications that may cause

unnecessary burden.

Process Redesign

Two States, Iowa and Montana, have

initiated simplified tax and wage

reporting processes where one form 941

serves the needs of both the Federal and

the state taxing authorities. What can be

done at the Federal level to encourage

cooperation between the states and the

IRS to expand this burden reducing

process?

• Is there anything outside of ongoing

efforts that you would recommend IRS

should consider that would simplify the

current employment tax reporting

process?

• What outreach efforts would you

recommend to encourage greater

cooperation among the States, IRS, and

the small business community to

facilitate such filing?

Other Burden

• When an employer has employees,

complying with IRS requirements

necessarily involves consideration of

other agency rules and procedures. For

example, a small business owner must

determine if an applicant can work in

the US, and if so, at what rate to

withhold taxes—if at all. Also, the small

business owner must be familiar with

Immigration and Naturalization Service

rules and procedures. It is often unclear

to which agency an employer should

refer questions and discuss issues. How

can the Federal government work more

effectively to minimize the employer’s

burden and assist the employer to

comply with the requirements of all

regulatory agencies?

• Proposals have been made for

legislation that would allow return free

filing for taxpayers who file the Form

1040EZ and 1040A. The IRS would use

W–2s, 1099s, and withholding to

calculate and send tax bills or refunds

to taxpayers, who could accept or

challenge the calculation. What would

the impact be on employers who would

have to obtain information from

employees to supply to the IRS? How

would this impact the burden of filing

employment tax forms?

• Small business owners do not

always understand how penalties are

assessed and how the amount of the

penalty is calculated. How can the IRS

disseminate better information to clarify

how penalties are assessed?

• As businesses grow they often face

new sets of employment tax issues.

Adding more employees can often mean

that a business will face more payroll

tax issues. For example, as a company’s

payroll increases the number of required

tax deposits might also increase and/or

the company may be required to

electronically transfer payroll

information to IRS. What can be done to

alleviate this burden?

Using Technology

The IRS provides several options for

filing Form 941 using modern

technology. IRS implemented TeleFile

in 1998. In April, 2000, the IRS

introduced 941 e-File.

• What else might the IRS do to

maximize the benefit of information

technology with respect to employment

taxes?

• Are there legislative or regulatory

changes that could facilitate greater use

of software and the Internet for filing

employment tax forms?

• Do you know of any specific

problems in IRS’ distribution of

information about employment tax law

changes that may be impeding small

business and self-employed taxpayers

from receiving necessary information

clearly and quickly?

• Tax laws frequently change. Small

businesses don’t always have the time to

keep up with the changes. How can

technology be best used to inform small

business about tax changes?

• What education/outreach is

working and what education/outreach is

needed?

• How can IRS make better use of its

Web site for burden reduction in this

area?

• The IRS is encouraging the

electronic filing of Form 941. IRS has a

941 e-file program. It is a relatively new

program with specified procedures. Are

there additional procedures or formats

needed to make it even easier for small

business to file online?

• Is there anything else the IRS might

do to revise the existing program or add

additional options that would maximize

the benefits of information technology

with respect to employment taxes?

Service Providers

• Many self-employed individuals

turn to service providers to prepare and

file their Federal employment tax

return. What is the role of the service

provider today? How has this role

changed in recent years?

• What special benefits do service

providers afford small business and selfemployed taxpayers?

• What role may service providers

play in the future that will help reduce

small business/self-employed tax

burden?

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 83 / Friday, April 28, 2000 / Notices 25009

HCFA Will Have a Full Day Roundtable

Session on May 10 on Provider

Enrollment for Medicare Billing

Privileges

HCFA is proposing to revise its

provider enrollment forms. It has

consulted with the industry, conducted

various outreach, including at least one

town meeting. In response to the

industry input, HCFA has made some

changes to the new forms and other

aspects of the proposal. Prior to

publishing the proposal for agency

review and public comment, HCFA

would like additional public dialogue

on the proposed forms. Drafts of the

proposed forms are at http://

www.hcfa.gov/regs/prdact95.htm. Key

issues are:

(1) Use of three separate forms to

target specific providers and suppliers

(855 for individual practitioners, 855A

for providers billing fiscal

intermediaries, and 855B for

organizations billing carriers);

(2) Differences between current and

proposed forms;

(3) Needs and use of the information;

and

(4) Use of information technology.

On May 11, the IRS Will Have a Full

Day Roundtable on Post Filing Burden

Post-filing time and out-of-pocket

costs incurred by taxpayers in an effort

to comply with the existing tax laws

have been largely unmeasured. In 1983

Arthur D. Little developed a

methodology to measure filing burden.

However, no method was developed to

measure post-filing burden. The focus of

this roundtable discussion will be to

assess ways in which post-filing burden

can and should be measured.

The issues to be discussed during this

roundtable session are:

(1) Defining Post Filing Burden. When

does the post-filing process begin? Can

post filing burden be initiated by the

taxpayer or only by IRS? What specific

activities constitute post-filing burden?

What is the best way to measure postfiling burden?

(2) Wage and Investment versus Small

Business. How is post-filing burden on

small businesses and the self employed

different from the post-filing burden on

wage and investment taxpayers?

(3) New Approaches. Given IRS’s

mission to provide American taxpayers

with quality service by helping them

understand and meet their tax

responsibilities what processes and

procedures do you think IRS can

streamline to alleviate post-filing

burden? As the IRS restructures, what

operational issues should it consider

that would reduce small business/selfemployed filing burden?

(4) The IRS is conducting a pilot in

which qualified tax professionals can

discuss taxpayer account issues with

IRS customer service representatives by

e-mail over the IRS Web site 24 hours

a day. How effective is such a program

in reducing post-filing burden? How

might the IRS maximize the benefit of

information technology to minimize

post filing burden?

Among the information collections

that DOT has chosen for this initiative

are two associated with rulemakings

that are either proposed or about to be

proposed. First, the Department

published in the Federal Register on

December 9, 1999 (64 FR 69076) a

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)

to revise the Department’s drug and

alcohol testing procedures. DOT has

held public listening sessions on its

proposed rulemaking in Washington DC

on March 20 and 21, in Los Angeles,

California on March 28, and in Dallas

Texas on March 30. Due to the close

proximity of the Information Initiative’s

roundtables to the drug and alcohol

sessions, the latter will be treated as part

of the Information Initiative in lieu of a

roundtable. The Department also will

conduct an electronic chat room

regarding the drug and alcohol NPRM

from April 3 to April 7. The issues

discussed and the comments submitted

in the drug and alcohol meetings and in

the electronic chat room will be

considered at the final Forum and in

OMB’s final report and

recommendations. Similarly, the

Department expects to publish shortly

an NPRM to revise its Motor Carrier

Hours of Service. After it is published,

DOT intends to hold a series of listening

sessions similar to those conducted for

the drug and alcohol NPRM. These

sessions also will be considered part of

the Information Initiative in lieu of a

Roundtable.

ED recently has begun a negotiated

rulemaking that would reengineer its

regulations to make it easier for

educational and financial institutions to

use electronic technology to document

interactions with students and ED. ED

expects to conduct a number of

stakeholder sessions between now and

early summer. These sessions will be

part of the Information Initiative.

On May 5, the participating agencies

will conduct an interagency roundtable

to share best practices and discuss the

challenges and opportunities of

information technology with respect to

information collections. This roundtable

will not be open to the public. An

agency may hold additional roundtables

on one or more of the collections, topics

or issues during the month of May if

warranted.

OMB recommends that attendees

register for the Forum and each

roundtable that they wish to attend.

Attendees may register by e-mail to

rmatzner@omb.eop.gov, or by fax at

202–395–7285. Submit registrations at

least 3 working days before the date of

a Roundtable. All attendees must

provide the following: full name, full

mailing address, telephone number, email address, and each roundtable that

he or she will attend. If an attendee will

attend the Forum held in the EEOB, he

or she must also provide his or her date

of birth and social security number.

John T. Spotila,

Administrator, Office of Information and

Regulatory Affairs.

[FR Doc. 00–10570 Filed 4–27–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3110–01–P

RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD

Agency Forms Submitted for OMB

Review

SUMMARY: In accordance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44

U.S.C. Chapter 35), the Railroad

Retirement Board (RRB) has submitted

the following proposal(s) for the

collection of information to the Office of

Management and Budget for review and

approval.

Summary of Proposal(s)

(1) Collection title: Application and

Claim for Unemployment Benefits and

Employment Service.

(2) Form(s) submitted: UI–1, UI–3.

(3) OMB Number: 3220–0022.

(4) Expiration date of current OMB

clearance: 8/31/2000.

(5) Type of request: Revision of a

currently approved collection.

(6) Respondents: Individuals or

households.

(7) Estimated annual number of

respondents: 11,200.

(8) Total annual responses: 78,700.

(9) Total annual reporting hours:

8,617.

(10) Collection description: Under

Section 2 of the Railroad

Unemployment Insurance Act,

unemployment benefits are provided for

qualified railroad employees. The

collection obtains the information

needed for determining the eligibility to

and amount of such benefits from

railroad employees.

Additional Information or Comments:

Copies of the forms and supporting

documents can be obtained from Chuck

Mierzwa, the agency clearance officer

(312–751–3363). Comments regarding

the information collection should be