Uncertainty of the cp freaks out stakeholders --- undermines support for the CP

(Colleen V. Chien, Justin D'Atri Visiting Professor of Business Law, Columbia Law School; Professor, Santa Clara University School of Law; 2013-2015 White House Senior Advisor, Innovation and Intellectual Property, “Rigorous Policy Pilots: Experimentation in the Administration of the Law, July, 2019, “104 Iowa L. Rev. 2313,” pg lexis//um-ef)

While a voluntary, limited or temporary pilot will have less impact than a mandatory, agency-wide, or permanent practice, there's also a risk that the [*2331] uncertainty associated with a temporary program will unsettle stakeholders and result in more speculative and premature reactions than would be elicited by a more formed proposal. 104To reduce these risks, an agency's disclosure should at least inform the public of: the motivation for the pilot, the policy to be tested out, the information sought, and (where available) the agency's commitment to action based on the results of the pilot - a best practice in experimentation called "pre-commitment." Rulemaking based on experimental evidence may require more disclosure. The Portland Cement 105decision of the D.C. Circuit and its progeny have been read to suggest "an obligation to reveal agency data from the outset," 106in order to support review and engagement with the data when dispositive. 107In cases where the data is conclusive, even if more work to disclose, with the shared experience comes a greater chance of a common, ground truth, at least that is the hope. 108As long as the agency faithfully follows the ordinary notice and comment process, procedural obstacles should be surmountable.