SupportStmnt- Part543 - 11.16.2016 v8

4

SUPPORTING STATEMENT

FOR

49 CFR PART 543, EXEMPTION FROM VEHICLE

THEFT PREVENTION STANDARD

(OMB Clearance Number 2127-0542)

A. JUSTIFICATION

1. Explain the circumstances that make the collection of information necessary. Attach a copy of the appropriate statute or regulation mandating or authorizing the collection of information.

49 U.S.C. Chapter 331 requires the Secretary of Transportation to promulgate a theft prevention standard to provide for the identification of certain motor vehicles and their major replacement parts to impede motor vehicle theft. 49 U.S.C. Section 33106 provides for an exemption to this identification process by petitions from manufacturers who equip covered vehicles with standard original equipment antitheft devices, which the Secretary determines are likely to be as effective in reducing or deterring theft as the identification system.

2. Indicate how, by whom, and for what purpose the information is to be used. Indicate actual use of information from the current collection.

This information will be used by NHTSA in exercising its delegated authority to grant exemptions from the vehicle identification requirements of 49 CFR Part 541. The statute requires, in Section 33106, that these exemptions be granted in whole or in part, based on "substantial evidence." Without this information, no exemption would be available from the parts-marking requirements and manufacturers would be required to identify parts on all vehicle lines designated for identification.

3. Describe whether the collection of information involves the use of technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

49 CFR Part 543 does not impose any obstacles for automobile manufacturers to use technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology for transmission and storage of the information. The manufacturer may use any form of improved information technology it deems necessary that minimizes the burden as long as the required reports are provided. Manufacturers have chosen to submit this information to NHTSA in hard copy form. However, to increase information technology, the agency will encourage manufacturers to continue to submit this information on computer disks (using NHTSA-approved format), by email format or by the internet.

4. Describe efforts to identify duplication

This information is not required by any other law or standard and would not be available without this regulation. This agency is the only agency authorized to grant an exemption from the requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard based on the manufacturer's petition. No similar information is currently available.

5. If the collection of information involves small businesses or other small entities, describe the methods used to minimize burden.

The agency believes that few, if any, small entities will be affected by this rule. No business is required to submit this data. This process is for any manufacturer who wishes to petition for an exemption, under Section 33106, from the application of the identification requirements of the Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard.

6. Describe the consequence to Federal Program or policy activities if the collection is not collected or collected less frequently.

The submittal of this information is a one-time-only submission and is made at the discretion of the manufacturer. If the manufacturer does not submit a petition for exemption under the procedures contained in 49 CFR Part 543, then it must comply with all requirements of 49 CFR Part 541.

7. Explain any special consequences that require the collection to be conducted in a manner inconsistent with the guidelines in 5 CFR 1320.6.

The procedures specified for this information collection are fully consistent with the guidelines set forth in 5 CFR 1320.6.

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.

The agency requested public comment on the extension of the previously approved collection in the Federal Register (79 FR 3153, January 17, 2014). No public comments were received in response to this request.

9. Explain any decision to provide any payment or gift to respondents, other than remuneration of contractors or grantees.

No gift or payment will be given to any respondent.

10. Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents.

Part 543 directs petitioners seeking confidential treatment of their submissions to 49 CFR Part 512, which sets forth the procedures for seeking confidentiality.

11. Provide additional justification for any questions on matters that are commonly considered private.

No questions of a sensitive nature are involved in this information collection.

12. Provide estimates of the hour burden of the collection of information on respondents.

The petition for exemption is made by the manufacturer according to whichever line(s) it determines has a standard equipment antitheft device which the manufacturer believes will meet the established minimum capabilities as promulgated in the Theft Prevention Standard. Section 33106 limited such exemptions to two vehicle lines per model year for each manufacturer until MY 1997. Thereafter, only one vehicle line may be exempted per model year.

The agency is unable to provide an accurate count of how many manufacturers will be affected, because the submission of an exemption petition is voluntary. Currently 23 manufacturers have one or more car lines exempted. Approximately 12 manufacturers are expected to apply in a typical year. A change in the number of respondents occurred as a result of mergers, partnerships and acquisitions that periodically occur between vehicle manufacturers. Disclosure burden for approximately 12 manufacturers, times the number of responses, multiplied by hours per response equals:

	Current	New	Total
Estimated annual petitions for exemption submittal per option:	9	3	12
Average hours per submittal	226 hrs	20 hrs
Reporting Burden (hours)
Reporting total hours for all manufacturers (# of manufacturers x burden hours):	2034 hrs	60 hrs	2094 hrs Approx. 2100 hrs
Reporting cost per hour	$36.62	$36.62
Reporting cost per manufacturer =	226 hrs x $36.62 = $8,276	20 hrs x $36.62 = $732
Subtotal for each submission method =	9 mfr’rs x $8,276 = $74,485	3 mfr’rs x $732 = $2,197
The total cost associated with the burden hours endured by the manufacturers effected is:	$74,485 + $2,197 =		$76,682 Approx. $77,000

13. Provide estimates of the total annual cost to the respondents or recordkeepers.

The petitions for exemptions require no additional costs to the respondents.

14. Provide estimates of annualized cost to the Federal Government.

Congress estimated that the required activities of the Department of Transportation under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 331 would cost the Department $200,000 annually (H. Rep. No. 1087, 98th Congress, 2nd Sess. (1984)).

The cost incurred by the Federal Government to analyze the information contained in each petition is estimated to be $93,545. The numbers of petitions have increased due to more exemption requests received for processing. However, the estimated costs incurred by the Federal Government will decrease because of the use of the new exemption application requirement.

15. Explain reasons for any program changes or adjustments reported in Items 13 or 14 of the OMB Form 83-I. (83-I Form is no longer required)

The collection is expected to require no additional costs to the respondents or recordkeepers. Based on another analysis of the exemption information NHTSA has received, as well as the comments the agency received, NHTSA has made a minor adjustment to the estimates provided in the NPRM. The streamlining of this process is expected to induce new petitions, but will decrease the total burden from 2300 to 2100 hours.

16. For collections of information whose results will be published, outline plans for tabulation, and publication.

This collection of information will not have the result published for statistical use.

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.

Approval is not sought to not display the expiration date for OMB approval.

18. Explain each exception to the certification statement identified in Item 19, “Certification for paperwork reduction act submissions,” of OMB Form 83-I.

No exceptions to the certification statement are made.

B. COLLECTIONS OF INFORMATION EMPLOYING STATISTICAL METHODS.

This collection of information does not employ statistical methods.