2018 FINAL SupportStmnt583.cb 11-27-17rv2

(2018)

OMB Control No. 2127-0573

49 CFR Part 583 – Automobile Parts Content Labeling

JUSTIFICATION

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

The American Automobile Labeling Act (AALA) requires all new passenger motor vehicles (including passenger cars, certain small buses, all light trucks and multipurpose passenger vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating of 8,500 pounds or less), to bear labels providing information about domestic and foreign content of their equipment. Part 583 establishes requirements for the disclosure of information relating to the countries of origin of the equipment of new passenger motor vehicles. NHTSA is committed to providing the most accurate and complete information available to its customers, the American traveling public, in a helpful and courteous fashion.

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

This information will be used by NHTSA to determine whether manufacturers are complying with the American Automobile Labeling Act (49 USC 32304). With the affixed label on the new passenger motor vehicles, it serves as an aid to potential purchasers in the selection of new passenger motor vehicles by providing them with information about the value of the U.S./Canadian and foreign parts of each vehicle, the countries of origin of the engine and transmission, and the site of the vehicle’s final assembly.

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

This standard requires labeling of new passenger motor vehicles by affected manufacturers. The standard specifies the design techniques that are to be used to produce the required labels. There are three options on how the paper label may appear on the vehicles. The labels are placed in a prominent location on each vehicle where it can be read from the exterior of the vehicle with the door closed, may be part of the Monroney price information label, or part of the fuel economy label. There is 100 percent automation for the labels, and the process involves automation process by electronics. The collection and storage of the labeling information by the manufacturers are accomplished through computers and other electronic devices.

The agency does not receive 100 percent of this information electronically. Primarily, manufacturers send the agency the information that will appear on vehicle labels in written format (hard copy). Forty-five percent of the information is received electronically. The agency will continue to encourage manufacturers to submit this information electronically by using computer disks (NHTSA approved format), by email format or by the internet for submitting labeling information.

4. Describe efforts to identify duplication. Show specifically why similar information cannot be used.

This information is not required by any other law or regulation and would not be available without the regulation. Under U.S.C. 32304, Congress requires this information to be submitted to the Department of Transportation. No other Department is responsible for collecting this information under 49 CFR Part 583. This information needed is not available elsewhere.

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

None of the manufacturers involved in this rule is a small business. Furthermore, manufacturers that produce a total of fewer than 1,000 passenger motor vehicles in a model year are exempted from providing the content information.

6. Describe the consequences to the Federal program or policy activities if the collection is not collected or collectedly less frequently.

If the information were required less frequently, NHTSA would not have current information to evaluate that manufacturers are in compliance with this rule. NHTSA could not effectively respond to inquiries received from Congress, other executive branches, federal agencies, and the public. NHTSA would not have sufficient information to initiate other rulemaking activities, if applicable.

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

The information collection is necessary to satisfy a statutory requirement, 15 U.S.C. 1950. Nevertheless, the only inconsistency in this reporting requirement from the guidelines of 5 CFR 1320.6 is in the number of copies required (3 copies).

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 action 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 (82 FR 42571, September 8, 2017) (copy attached). No public comments were received in response to this request.

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

No payment or remuneration will be provided to any respondent.

10. Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents.

No issue of confidentiality is involved in this information collection.

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

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

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

Estimate of respondents - 20

Number of responses per respondent – 4

Total annual responses – 80

Time per response 31.525

Annual hours per respondent – 2,522

The Agency estimates that the estimated number of manufacturers responding to this collection will be 20. Based on manufacturer data received, 8 of the 20 estimated responders provided information about their annual hours for this collection of information.  The data also indicated that on average, collecting and preparing the information for this collection would take approximately 2,522 annual hours per respondent/manufacturer. Therefore, the agency estimates a total annual burden of 50,440 (2,522 x 20).

There have been no changes in the requirements since the last approval.

13. Provide estimates of the total annual cost to the respondents or record keepers resulting from the collection of information (do not include the cost of any hour burden shown in Question 12 or 14).

Based on direct manufacturer input, we estimate the total annual cost to the respondents is $3,716,740. This figure is derived from annual cost provided by manufacturers for the collection of information, which average $185,837 per manufacturer. Multiplying this average cost by 20 respondents, we arrive at a total cost of $3,716,740 (20 x 185,837).

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

The annualized cost to the Federal government to review the respondents’ reports for compliance, to analyze the information, to distribute reports to NHTSA users, and to control and to store the information is $20,384 annually or 416 total annual hours ($49 per hour). The employee works 2,080 annual hours and 20 percent of the employee working hours is devoted to administering and monitoring the program (2,080 hours x 20 percent = 416 hours).

15. Explain the reasons for any program changes or adjustments reported in Items 13 or 14 of the OMB Form 83-I.

This is a reinstatement with a change to a previous approved information collection. There were 21 manufacturers that submit information, due to a merger, there was one less manufacturer that submitted information. Therefore, the decrease in respondents from 21 to 20 was a result in the decrease of annual burden hours of 52,962 to 50,440.

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

This collection of information will not have the results published.

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 of the certification statement identified in Item 19, “Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions,” of OMB Form 83-1.

No exceptions to the certification statement are made.