TABLE OF CONTENTS
JUSTIFICATION
A.1. Explain the circumstances that make the collection of information necessary. Identify any Legal or administrative requirements that necessitate the collection. Attach a copy of the appropriate section of each statute and regulation mandating or authorizing the collection of information.
a. Circumstances making the collection necessary……………………………… 3
b. Statute authorizing the collection of information…………………………….. 5
A.2. Indicate how, by whom, and for what purpose the information is to be used. Except for a new collection, indicate the actual use the agency has made of the information received from the current collection………………………...……… 6
A.3. Describe whether, and to what extent, the collection of information involves the use of automated, electronic, mechanical or other technological collection techniques or other information technology. Also describe any considerations of using information technology to reduce burden…………………………………. 7
A.4. Describe efforts to identify duplication. Show specifically why any similar information, already available cannot be used or modified for use for the purposes described in Item 2 above………………………….…………………………….. 8
A.5. If the collection of information involves small businesses or other small entities, describe the methods used to minimize burden………………………………….. 9
A.6. Describe the consequences to Federal Program or policy activities if the collection is not collected or collected less frequently……………………………………… 9
A.7. Explain any special circumstances that require the collection to be conducted in a manner inconsistent with the guidelines set forth in 5 CFR 1320.6……………... 9
A.8. Provide a copy of the FEDERAL REGISTER document soliciting comments on extending the collection of information, a summary of all public comments responding to the notice, and a description of the agency’s actions in response to the comments. Describe efforts to consult with persons outside the agency to obtain their views……………………………………………………………….. 10
A.9. Explain any decisions to provide any payment or gift to respondents, other than remuneration of contractors or grantees……………………………..…………. 13
A.10. Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents……….…… 13
A.11. Provide additional justification for any questions of a sensitive nature, such as sexual behavior or attitudes, religious beliefs, and other matters that are commonly considered private………………………….……………………….. 13
A.12. Provide estimates of the hour burden of the collection of information on the respondents…………………………………….……………………………….. 14
A.13. Provide an estimate of the total annual cost to the respondents or record keepers resulting from the collection of information……………………………………. 14
A.14. Provide estimates of the annualized cost to the Federal Government………….. 15
A.15. Explain the reasons for any program changes or adjustments in Items 13 or 14 of the OMB 83-I…………………………………………………………………… 15
A.16. For collection of information whose results will be published, outline plans for tabulation and publication………………………………………………………. 15
A.17. If seeking approval to not display the expiration date for OMB approval of the information collection, explain the reasons that display would be inappropriate. 15
A.18. Explain each exception to the certification statement identified in Item 19, “Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions” of the OMB Form 83-I
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) of the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) is seeking approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to conduct a survey of young drivers ages 16 through 20. The proposed survey would collect information related to young driver issues and traffic safety problems for use in strategic planning and intervention development.
NHTSA was established to reduce the number of deaths, injuries, and economic losses resulting from motor vehicle crashes on the Nation’s highways. As part of this statutory mandate, NHTSA is authorized to conduct research as a foundation for the development of motor vehicle standards and traffic safety programs.
This collection supports the Department of Transportation's strategic goal in safety by working towards elimination of transportation-related deaths and injuries. The collected information will be used to develop strategies and initiatives directed towards a group that is overrepresented in crashes and crash fatalities and is more likely than other people to engage in behaviors associated with higher crash risk – young drivers.
1. Youth Traffic Safety Problem
Motor vehicle crashes continue to be the leading cause of death for people of young driver age.1 In 2011, there were 1,987 drivers ages 15 through 20 that died in motor vehicle crashes, and 4,347 drivers of that age who were involved in fatal crashes. While young drivers in that age range accounted for 6 percent of all (211.9 million) licensed drivers in the United States in 2011, they accounted for 10.1 percent of all drivers involved in fatal crashes, and 12.2 percent of drivers involved in fatal single-vehicle crashes. They composed 13 percent of drivers involved in police-reported crashes.2 This overrepresentation is reflected in self-report information. Telephone survey data show drivers ages 18 through 20 more likely than older drivers to report recent crash experience,3 and people ages 16 through 20 more likely than older individuals to report being injured in a recent motor vehicle crash.4
The greater crash likelihood is not just a function of the relative inexperience of young drivers, but also elevated engagement in behaviors that increase crash risk. Drivers ages 16 through 20 are more likely than drivers overall to agree that they enjoy the feeling of driving fast (52% compared to 34%), tend to pass other cars more often than are passed (44% compared to 30%), and get impatient with slow drivers (65% compared to 53% overall).5 Of drivers involved in fatal crashes in 2011, the 15-to-20 age group had the highest percentage of drivers (39% of males and 24% of females) that were speeding at the time of the crash.6 In terms of distractive behavior, 68% of drivers ages 18 through 20 report that they will answer an incoming call on their cell phone while they are driving and 44% say they have sent text messages or e-mails while driving.7 Reaching for objects, talking or listening to a hand-held device and texting while driving have all been associated with elevated crash risk.8 Alcohol-impaired driving has been a major contributing factor to the fatal crash problem, and remains an issue for young drivers under 21 despite their being subject to State minimum drinking age laws. Of all drivers ages 15 through 20 that were involved in fatal crashes in 2011, 20% had a blood alcohol concentration of .08 or higher.9 Wearing a seat belt is the most effective measure a person can take to avoid fatality and injury in the event of a crash. Yet observation data consistently show lower seat belt use among young people approximately 16 through 24 compared to older age groups. In 2011, seat belt use was 79% among ages 16 through 24 compared to 84% for ages 25 through 69 and 87% for age 70 and older.10 Of all passenger vehicle occupants ages 16 through 20 that were killed in crashes in 2011, 55% were unrestrained.11
2. The need for current information
Minimum drinking age laws and graduated driver licensing have worked to improve young driver safety. Highly visible enforcement of traffic safety laws, combined with communication campaigns conducted through channels preferred by young people, have also been major parts of the effort to reduce crashes and fatalities. But the statistics in the preceding section indicate that much work remains.
Development and refinement of strategies to improve young driver safety requires information on where they stand with respect to behavior, attitudes, perceptions, and knowledge. To address young driver safety, we need to know when problem driving behaviors occur, how frequently they occur, and the context in which they occur. That information will provide guidance on how to target the source of problems and how to structure traffic safety interventions for young drivers. But the information also needs to be current because of the constancy of change within society and how it affects the ways in which people perceive the world and behave within it. For example, continual advances in technology have influenced youth culture, affecting such things as norms of communication and social interaction. Young driver behaviors and attitudes likely differ from youth of just a few years ago.
The Young Driver Survey is designed to respond to information needs of NHTSA as identified by staff from across sections of the agency. It also responds to information needs of other organizations involved in traffic safety (see Section A.8). The Young Driver Survey will address the frequency and context of unsafe driver behaviors by youth ages 16 through 20, types of risky situations that people of young driver age experience as vehicle passengers, parental influence on young drivers, young driver training and education, and young driver attitudes and perceptions concerning selected traffic safety issues.
Title 23, United States Code, Chapter 4, Section 403 (Attachment 1) gives the Secretary authorization to use funds appropriated to carry out this section to conduct research and development activities on all aspects of highway and traffic safety systems and conditions relating to vehicle, highway, driver, passenger, motorcyclist, bicyclist, and pedestrian characteristics. Section 403 further gives the Secretary authorization to conduct research and development activities with respect to human behavioral factors and their effect on highway traffic safety, including driver education, impaired driving, and distracted driving. Section 403 also authorizes the Secretary to conduct research on, evaluations of, and identification of best practices related to driver education programs and make recommendations for harmonizing driver education and multistage graduated licensing systems. (See 23 U.S.C. 403(b)(1)(A)(i), 23 U.S.C. 403 (b)(1)(B)(i, ii, iii), 23 U.S.C. 403 (b)(1)(E)).
The purpose of this survey is to provide critical information needed by NHTSA to develop, implement, and maintain effective countermeasures for young drivers that meet the Agency’s mandate to improve highway traffic safety. The data collected in the survey will be used to assist NHTSA in its ongoing responsibilities for: (a) planning program activity which addresses young driver issues; and (b) providing support to groups involved in improving public safety. As described in Section B, the survey will be administered to independent samples drawn from eight States. Those States will particularly benefit by receiving detailed traffic safety information specific to their own young driver populations, which they then can use in carrying out their own strategic planning.
The survey will identify the extent to which young drivers engage in different activities that affect the quality of driving, and will allow assessment of interrelationships between those behaviors. This will provide guidance in determining the level of effort needed to address different traffic safety problems occurring among young drivers, and which young drivers to focus attention upon. The information on interrelationships will also allow assessment of which traffic safety problem behaviors can be addressed in isolation, and which can’t. Other information collected by the survey will show the context in which different driving behaviors occur, which will help to determine how traffic safety countermeasures should be structured and situated. For example, the survey includes a module that collects detailed information on how young drivers obtain alcohol and where they drink. This information will be cross-tabulated with responses to questions about drinking and driving in order to identify strategic points for intervention. There also will be information cross-tabulated against crashes, such as types of driver education experience, for similar purposes. Another area of inquiry will be passenger experience with drivers exhibiting different behaviors or conditions. The results may suggest the need for skills development programs that empower young people to avoid certain types of situations.
Overall, NHTSA will use the survey data to:
Apply to its own program assistance and technical activities;
Define appropriate targets for countermeasures;
Provide support for agency and Departmental initiatives regarding young drivers;
Assist Federal, State, and local highway safety agencies to reach decisions that will most effectively allocate resources; and
Contribute to development of effective policies and programs related to young driver safety.
The initial draft questionnaire for this survey was developed by the Questionnaire Design Research Laboratory (QDRL) at the National Center for Health Statistics. As part of this process, NHTSA asked the QDRL to recommend a mode of survey administration based on their interaction with young drivers during the cognitive testing. The QDRL recommended that the survey employ an electronic mode, and that it be self-administered. NHTSA proceeded to select the Web mode for survey administration. Initially, NHTSA planned to make Web the sole mode of survey administration. However, the agency reconsidered this position based on published Web-only response rates and use of mixed mode designs by the survey industry to address declining response rates. NHTSA has now structured the survey as a mixed mode design with Web as the primary response mode, meaning that the initial contacts with prospective respondents will only offer Web response. A mail option with paper questionnaire will be offered only after there has been no response by prospective respondents to the electronic mode. For respondents unable or unwilling to go to the survey Website, and don’t want to fill out a paper questionnaire, they can request that the interview be conducted by telephone.
NHTSA has contracted with Abt SRBI to develop and conduct the Young Driver Survey. As part of this work, Abt SRBI will develop a Website for administering the survey. Requirements for the Website include:
Basing the visual layout of the questions on principles of heuristics that people follow in interpreting visual cues;
Making the survey easily navigable from page to page;
Employing minimal use of transition screens;
Incorporating user assistance tools, such as help screens for certain items (e.g., the respondent could click a link to get a definition that would come up if needed);
Inserting placeholders so that respondents could pause and leave the system and then re-enter (at the point of departure) without losing the responses previously entered;
Inserting a review and edit feature;
Programming in consistency checks; and
Inserting a clearly marked mechanism by which respondents can alert the Contractor to operational difficulties in taking the survey.
Usability testing during Website development (described in Section B) will include testing the Website using mobile devices since that is how some young drivers will access the survey. Moreover, NHTSA is stipulating that contact letters include a QR (Quick Response) code to allow respondents to get to the Website right away.
Few youth are expected to request a telephone interview. However, for those that do, the survey will be administered using Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI). Overall, the Web and CATI systems perform a number of functions facilitating the administration of the survey for respondents, including:
Providing correct question sequence;
Automatically executing skip patterns based on prior question answers (which decreases overall interview time and consequently the burden on respondents);
Providing random rotation of specified questions or response categories (to avoid bias);
Ensuring that questions can’t be skipped;
Applying range and consistency checks;
Rejecting invalid responses or data entries.
This survey focuses on a very specific population, young drivers ages 16 through 20. While a number of traffic safety surveys have included youth in this age range as part of a general population sample, there are relatively few youth participating in those surveys even when over-sampling of younger persons is employed. Moreover, because those surveys are primarily intended for an adult population, the questionnaire content and wording are not designed with youth and young driver issues in mind.
There have been some traffic safety surveys directed specifically at youth. However, these have typically focused on a single topic (distracted driving being the recent topic of interest), and/or have been administered through schools that agreed to participate in the survey (resulting in no information for the large number of youth not attending school).
NHTSA is in a unique position due to its relationships with the States and those State agencies involved with driver licensing. NHTSA will seek States to participate in the Young Driver Survey, with State driver license databases serving as the sampling frames for the survey and the States systematically drawing sample from them. Not all States will be able to participate, and this consequently would not be a national sample. But the characteristics of young drivers should be adequately represented by youth in the participating States. This will result in a survey that, through a combination of factors, makes it unique:
A systematic selection of a young driver sample from a sampling frame of drivers;
Including young drivers within the sample that are not attending school;
Designing the survey content based on young driver issues; and
Covering a broad spectrum of young driver issues of interest to the traffic safety community.
The fourth bullet above raises an important point. The value of the survey will not just be in the responses to individual items, but also in how items relate to one another. There are a number of context questions which may help to explain responses to behavioral questions. Moreover, NHTSA needs to see how different behaviors relate to one another. Thus, for example, in responding to comments entered into the NHTSA Docket following publication of the 60-day Federal Register Notice, NHTSA added questions that had been used on previous NHTSA surveys (drowsy driving and distraction). Clearly some information already existed for those items. However, there were only a small number of young drivers in those surveys, and the questions are now integrated into a data collection instrument having broader scope in young driver-specific issues so that we can see how the responses to the items relate to other driving patterns. In total, this is a unique survey, and one that has generated significant interest outside NHTSA as reflected by comments submitted to the NHTSA Docket.
There will be no impact on small businesses or other small entities. The collection of information involves randomly selected individuals in their residences, not small businesses.
A.6. Describe the consequence to Federal program or policy activities if the collection is not conducted or is conducted less frequently, as well as any technical or legal obstacles to reducing burden.
The information is necessary for NHTSA to be able to make strategic planning decisions in the young driver area on an informed basis. The importance of youth as a focus of traffic safety initiatives is recognized by NHTSA through such measures as establishing a Young Person Workgroup composed of members from across the agency who work on youth issues. The Group’s overall goal is to address traffic safety issues involving young persons, and Group activities have included strategic planning, information sharing, and coordination. The Group has reviewed the Young Driver Survey Questionnaire, offered input, and sees it as important in filling gaps in information.
NHTSA is working to keep the burden to respondents at a minimum. While there are a large number of questions that NHTSA plans to administer, the agency will limit survey length to 15 minutes by apportioning the questions across two separate questionnaires. Each respondent will only receive one of the questionnaires, and will participate in only one interview.
No special circumstances require the collection to be conducted in a manner inconsistent with the guidelines in 5 CFR 1320.6.
FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE: A copy of the Federal Register Notice which notified the public of NHTSA’s intent to conduct this information collection, and provided a 60-day comment period, was published on June 6, 2013 (Vol. 78, No. 109, Pages 34154-34156 (Attachment 2). Comments were received from 6 sources. The comments are included in NHTSA’s submission to OMB. Following is a summary of each comment and NHTSA’s response:
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) wrote that it “strongly believes that this information collection is necessary for the optimal performance of NHTSA functions and that the survey data will have significant practical utility in promoting the goal of improving youth highway safety….. The NTSB encourages NHTSA to explore in this survey the myriad ways in which distraction occurs and discover effective ways of addressing these issues….. The NTSB asks that NHTSA also emphasize the dangers of and countermeasures for addressing substance-impaired driving in this survey.”
Response: NHTSA had already included a module on distracted driving within the survey, which included a question asking the perceived impact on the quality of driving of different in-vehicle activities such as texting, talking on the phone, eating, drinking, and talking to passengers. But rather than adding more items to that list, NHTSA decided to add two questions that get to the core of the issue, the driver taking his or her eyes off the road. New questions, taken from NHTSA’s distraction survey, were inserted that ask the usual reason why the respondent takes his/her eyes off the road while driving, and how long the respondent thinks that a driver can take his or her eyes off the road before driving becomes significantly more dangerous. Regarding the NTSB comment about substance-impaired driving, the NHTSA questionnaire had only addressed alcohol. NHTSA has responded to the comment by adding a module to the questionnaire that addresses other substance categories. Most of the substance categories were selected based on general usage frequencies found by the Monitoring the Future survey sponsored by DHHS. The NHTSA questionnaire now asks the young drivers if they have ever taken any of 7 substances before driving, how soon after taking the substance they started driving, the effects they think the substance has on driving, and whether they have ridden with a driver they believed was high on some substance other than alcohol.
The National Safety Council (NSC) wrote that they “convened a conference call with our network of organizational partners and teen driving coalition members from across the country to gather their feedback about needs from such a survey.” This generated a number of items which spanned eight general areas. There are too many to list here, but they may be viewed in the materials included in NHTSA’s submission to OMB.
Response: The NHTSA questionnaire already addressed each of the general areas identified by the NSC. Many specific items were also already being addressed. NHTSA has reviewed the NSC list and added several items to the questionnaire as a result: use of simulators in driver education, reasons for delay in getting a license, experience with near misses, who paid the fine when ticketed, and perceptions of the likelihood of being stopped for driving violations.
The AAA recommended ensuring diversity (geographic, demographic, and socio-economic) among survey participants; adding non-drivers to the sample; examining experience and attitudes as passengers of other teen drivers; asking about drugged driving, drowsy driving, awareness of their State GDL system, and compliance with restrictions set by law or by parents; and replicating the survey at a later time to assess trends.
Response: The survey methodology that will be employed should produce the diversity recommended by the AAA. However, expansion of the survey to include non-drivers will not be possible under the chosen methodology. Regarding experience as a passenger, several questions were added asking if the respondent has recently been the passenger of a substance- or alcohol-impaired driver. The questions do not set the age of the driver because NHTSA first wants to learn how often youth are passengers of drivers they think may be impaired. Presumably the impaired drivers would tend to be close in age to the respondents. Regarding the other areas specified by the AAA, some already were covered by the NHTSA questionnaire. However, as indicated earlier, a drugged driving module was added to the survey based on docket comments. In addition, NHTSA has added a module on drowsy driving in response to the AAA suggestion. The questions were taken from a NHTSA Drowsy Driving Survey conducted in 2002.
A researcher provided information on a study he had conducted that identified predictors of increased risk of future involvement in crashes among novice Canadian adolescent drivers.
Response: The list of several predictors was reviewed, and one of them (supervised practice) was added to the survey.
An anonymous comment was submitted suggesting that NHTSA should consider including information in the survey about how the teenagers’ friends drive.
Response: The survey presently includes questions asking about the respondents’ experiences as passengers, including asking about the alertness or condition of the driver (i.e., not paying attention to the road; impaired by alcohol or other substances). The need to keep the survey to a reasonable length precludes expanding into the general driving behavior of peers.
Delphi, which is a company that identified itself as a “global supplier of automotive technology and a leader in providing automotive safety solutions to automotive manufacturers globally” offered several recommendations: increase the number of participating States, conduct the study in two waves (one during the Summer and one during the Winter), provide a significant incentive to respondents to spur participation, and review all recent studies on the young driver age group in order to address questions not quantified in other studies.
Response: Delphi appeared not to be aware that a number of States would not be able to participate due to State laws or policies imposing restrictions on how their data can be used. Other States will choose not to participate. Other considerations are the resources which NHTSA will have to apply to the study. The agency believes that seeking eight States spread across the four Census Regions will provide an adequately representative sample. As to carrying out the survey in two seasonal waves, there are three issues involved. One is the substantial amount of additional resources that would be needed to carry out what is essentially an additional survey. Second is the increased effort that would be needed from States to select a new sample. Third is that this is a new survey that must undergo extensive development work. NHTSA believes it best to focus on a single survey at this time. As to incentives, NHTSA plans to provide some small monetary expression of appreciation to respondents (see Section B.4). NHTSA considers this preferable in lieu of the lottery-type prizes suggested by Delphi. Regarding the literature review and survey content, see Section A.4 as to how NHTSA is avoiding duplication.
A copy of a second Federal Register Notice (Vol. 79, No. 56 Pages 16097-16098), which announced that this information collection request will be forwarded to OMB, was published March 24, 2014 (Attachment 3).
EXPERT CONSULTATION: Initial content for the survey was obtained through a request by the NHTSA survey project manager to experts working in different NHTSA sections, asking them to identify their information needs. This information was provided to the Questionnaire Design Research Laboratory (QDRL) at the National Center for Health Statistics, who proceeded to develop the draft questionnaire. As the QDRL engaged in cognitive testing of draft items, additional issues emerged that were incorporated into the questionnaire. The developed questionnaire was then reviewed by experts at NHTSA, whose input led to additional modifications. As indicated in the previous section, extensive input submitted to the NHTSA Docket led to additional modifications to the questionnaire.
The population that will be surveyed is an extremely difficult age group to motivate to take a survey, particularly since many of them are inundated with surveys at school. Based on our knowledge of youth, NHTSA believes that a payment of some amount to respondents will be necessary to obtain a reasonable response rate. The amount and method of payment will be determined through an experiment conducted during the pilot test (see Section B.4). Abt SRBI is teaming with the Fors Marsh Group in carrying out this survey. The Fors Marsh Group has tested the impact of incentive conditions on response rates for the Department of Defense’s Youth Poll. NHTSA is using results from that testing to help formulate the experimental conditions for its Youth Survey.
Besides providing monetary incentives during the survey, NHTSA will provide payment to subjects participating in usability testing that will precede the survey. The usability testing will be designed to identify any problems in the interface between survey and respondent. That testing will occur in the Fors Marsh Group User Experience Laboratory. Payment to people going to a laboratory for testing of this nature is standard practice within the industry. The subjects will be offered $40 to participate.
All prospective respondents will receive a unique PIN to access the Web version of the survey. Respondents will only be able to access the information submitted under that PIN.
The introduction to the survey will tell respondents that the information they provide when answering the questionnaire will be kept completely separate from the information that was used to contact them so as to treat it as anonymous. They will be told that the information they provide will be used for statistical purposes only, and will not be used in a way where they can be identified.
The survey contains a number of questions that would commonly be considered sensitive or private. They include questions about alcohol use and driving, other drug use and driving, racing behavior, and being stopped by police while in a motor vehicle. The questions are necessary for NHTSA to be able to identify the extent to which specific traffic safety problem behaviors occur among young drivers, and the context in which they occur, so that the agency can develop approaches to strategically address those problems. Justification for each of the individual items is provided in Attachments 4 and 5.
It should be noted that respondents are made aware that participation is completely voluntary, and that they may refuse to answer any questions with which they feel uncomfortable.
This study will entail two Phases. The initial Phase will adapt the questionnaire to multi-mode administration, develop the Website for Web administration, set up the mail data collection mode, and pilot test the survey. The Web site development will include usability testing with 27 participants. Sessions will take place over a period of 60-to-90 minutes. For purposes of burden estimation an estimate of 90 minutes is used in the calculations below. The pilot test will use a total drawn sample of 7,000 (see Section B.4 for details). For purposes of burden estimation this project will assume a response rate upper limit of 45%. Average interview duration is estimated at 15 minutes. The maximum estimated burden for Phase 1 is:
Usability Testing: 27 x 1 ½ hours = 40.5 hours
Pilot Test: 7,000 x 45% x 15 minutes = 787.5 hours
Total Phase 1 Burden: 828 hours
The full administration of the survey will occur in Phase 2. There will be two versions of the questionnaire in order to limit the burden to respondents, with each version averaging 15 minutes in length. Eight States will participate in the survey, with sufficient sample drawn to obtain 8,000 completed interviews per State (4,000 per questionnaire version). The estimated burden is:
Phase 2 Burden: 8 States x 8,000 x 15 minutes = 16,000 hours
The maximum total estimated burden for the Yong Driver Survey is:
828 hours (Phase 1) + 16,000 hours (Phase 2) = 16,828 hours (Total)
Since respondents will be contacted at home, the survey will not be an actual cost to the respondents (i.e., they will be participating during non-salaried hours). However, the time they spend on the survey can still be looked at in terms of what it would have cost if the respondents had spent that amount of time on a task while on the job. Preliminary estimates for November 2013 from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, list average hourly earnings in private industry as $24.15 (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t19.htm ). The estimated 16,828 interviewing hours multiplied by average hourly earnings of $24.15 totals $406,396 cost if the respondents had spent that amount of time on the job.
There are no record keeping or reporting costs to respondents. Respondents will be contacted randomly, and asked for their attitudes, knowledge, and behavior regarding specific traffic safety topics. All responses are provided spontaneously. Each respondent only participates once in the data collection. Thus there is no preparation of data required or expected of respondents. Respondents do not incur: (a) capital and startup costs, or (b) operation, maintenance, and purchase costs as a result of participating in the survey.
The estimated annualized cost to the Federal government is approximately $792,000. The amount is based on the Contract award amount for a two year period.
This is a new information collection. It requires a program change due to agency discretion to add the estimated 16,828 hours to develop and implement the Young Driver Survey.
NHTSA plans to publish results from the survey as a series of Research Notes. The Research Notes will present univariate and bivariate analyses, as well as multi-variate analyses where appropriate. Published materials will emphasize that the aggregated data extrapolate to the eight participating States only, that these are not national estimates.
NHTSA will display the expiration date for OMB approval.
No exceptions to the certification are made.
1 National Center for Health Statistics. 10 Leading Causes of Injury Deaths by Age Group Highlighting Unintentional Injury Deaths, United States – 2010. Retrieved 7/24/13 from http://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/pdf/10LCID_Unintentional_Deaths_2010-a.pdf
2 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. (2013) Young Drivers. (Traffic Safety Facts 2011 Data No. DOT HS 811 744). Washington, DC: Author. http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811744.pdf
3 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. (2012) Young Drivers Report the Highest Level of Phone Involvement in Crash or Near-Crash Incidences. (Traffic Safety Facts Research Note No. DOT HS 811 611) Washington, DC: Author. http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/staticfiles/nti/pdf/811611.pdf
4 Boyle, John M. and Lampkin, L. (2008) 2007 Motor Vehicle Occupant safety Survey. Volume 4: Crash Injury and Emergency Medical Services Report. Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT. http://www.nhtsa.gov/Driving+Safety/Research+&+Evaluation/2007+Motor+Vehicle+Occupant+Safety+Survey
5 Royal, D. (2004) National Survey of Speeding and Unsafe Driving Attitudes and Behavior: 2002. (Report No. DOT HS 809 730) Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT. http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/DOT/NHTSA/Traffic%20Injury%20Control/Articles/Associated%20Files/HS809730.pdf
6 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. (2013) Traffic Safety Facts 2011. Speeding. (Report No. DOT HS 811 751) Washington, DC: Author. http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811751.pdf
7 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. (2012) Young Drivers Report the Highest Level of Phone Involvement in Crash or Near-Crash Incidences. (Traffic Safety Facts Research Note No. DOT HS 811 611) Washington, DC: Author. http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/staticfiles/nti/pdf/811611.pdf
8 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. (2010) Overview of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s Driver Distraction Program. (Report No. DOT HS 811 299) Washington, DC: Author. http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/staticfiles/nti/distracted_driving/pdf/811299.pdf
9 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. (2013) Traffic Safety Facts 2011 Data. Alcohol-Impaired Driving. (Report No. DOT HS 811 700) Washington, DC: Author. http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811700.pdf
10Pickrell, Timothy M. and Jianqiang Ye Tony. (2013) Occupant Restraint Use in 2011: Results From the National Occupant Protection Use Survey Controlled Intersection Study. (Report No. DOT HS 811 697. Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT. http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811697.pdf
11 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. (2013) Traffic Safety Facts 2011 Data. Occupant Protection. (Report No. DOT HS 811 729) Washington, DC: Author. http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811729.pdf
| File Type | application/msword |
| File Title | Table of Contents |
| Author | john.siegler |
| Last Modified By | alan.block |
| File Modified | 2014-10-23 |
| File Created | 2014-10-23 |