60-day notice

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 113 / Wednesday, June 12, 2019 / Notices
(i.e., non-advanced) air bag, such as
those used in non-US markets. Saleen
found that, in addition to these singlestage systems not being FMVSS No. 208compliant, adapting these single-stage
air bag systems so that they can be
installed in the S1 would take a similar
amount of time as developing a
compliant advanced air bag system, and
thus would not meet Saleen’s start-ofproduction deadline. Third, Saleen
investigated providing a computer
simulation analysis to show that the S1
would ‘‘comply structurally’’ with
several crashworthiness standards,
including FMVSS No. 208.15 However,
Saleen states that this simulation testing
was not scheduled to begin until the
first quarter of 2019.
Public Interest
Saleen states in both petitions that an
exemption would be in the public
interest and consistent with the
objective of the Safety Act because the
development of the S1 provides direct
employment to approximately 30
employees and indirect employment to
over 100 employees. Saleen further
projects that, once production of the S1
starts, the S1 would support numerous
additional jobs relating to the
distribution and sale of the vehicle.
V. Comment Period
NHTSA seeks comment from the
public on the merits of Saleen’s
application for a temporary exemption
from FMVSS No. 126 and the air bag
requirements of FMVSS No. 208. After
considering public comments and other
available information, NHTSA will
publish a notice of final action on the
application in the Federal Register.
(Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30113; delegation of
authority at 49 CFR 1.95.)
Issued under authority delegated in 49 CFR
1.95 and 501.5.
Heidi Renate King,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2019–12332 Filed 6–11–19; 8:45 am]

jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P

15 The petition does not explain what is meant by
‘‘comply structurally.’’

VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:00 Jun 11, 2019

Jkt 247001

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[U.S. DOT Docket Number NHTSA–2016–
0065]

Reports, Forms, and Recordkeeping
Requirements
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA), U.S.
Department of Transportation.
ACTION: Request for comment on the
renewal of collection of information.
AGENCY:

Before a Federal agency can
collect certain information from the
public, it must receive approval from
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB). Under procedures established
by the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995, before seeking OMB approval,
Federal agencies must solicit public
comment on proposed collections of
information, including extensions and
reinstatement of previously approved
collections. This document describes a
renewal of a collection of information
for which NHTSA intends to seek OMB
approval.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before August 12, 2019.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
using any of the following methods. All
comments must have the applicable
DOT docket number (i.e., NHTSA–
2016–0065) noted conspicuously on
them.
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
online instructions for submitting
comments.
• Mail: Docket Management Facility,
M–30: U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12–140, Washington, DC
20590–0001.
• Hand Delivery or Courier: 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
Washington, DC 20590–0001, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
Telephone: 1–800–647–5527.
• Fax: 202–493–2251.
Instructions: All submissions must
include the agency name and docket
number for this proposed collection of
information. Note that all comments
received will be posted without change
to http://www.regulations.gov, including
any personal information provided.
Please see the Privacy Act heading
below.
Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search
the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the
SUMMARY:

PO 00000

Frm 00165

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

27395

name of the individual submitting the
comment (or signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may
review DOT’s complete Privacy Act
Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR
19477–78) or you may visit http://
DocketInfo.dot.gov.
Docket: For access to comments
received, go to http://
www.regulations.gov or the street
address listed above. Follow the online
instructions for accessing the dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
further information, or for background
documents, contact Stephen Hench,
Office of Chief Counsel (NCC–0100),
Room W41–229, NHTSA, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590. Telephone: 202–366–2992.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
before an agency submits a proposed
collection of information to OMB for
approval, it must first publish a
document in the Federal Register
providing a 60-day comment period and
otherwise consult with members of the
public and affected agencies concerning
each proposed collection of information.
OMB has promulgated regulations
describing what must be included in
such a document. Under OMB’s
regulation, see 5 CFR 1320.8(d), an
agency must ask for public comment on
the following:
(i) Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(ii) the accuracy of the agency’s
estimate of the burden of the proposed
collection of information, including the
validity of the methodology and
assumptions used;
(iii) how to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and
(iv) how to minimize the burden of
the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including the use
of appropriate automated, electronic,
mechanical, or other technological
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology, e.g., permitting
electronic submission of responses.
In compliance with these
requirements, NHTSA asks for public
comments on the following collection of
information:
Title: Defect and Noncompliance
Reporting and Notification.
Type of Request: Renewal of a
currently approved information
collection.
OMB Control Number: 2127–0004.

E:\FR\FM\12JNN1.SGM

12JNN1

jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES

27396

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 113 / Wednesday, June 12, 2019 / Notices

Affected Public: Businesses or
individuals.
Abstract: This notice requests
comment on NHTSA’s proposed
renewal of an approved collection of
information, designated as OMB No.
2127–0004. This collection covers the
information collection requirements
found within various statutory
provisions of the Motor Vehicle Safety
Act of 1966 (Act), 49 U.S.C. 30101, et
seq., that address and require
manufacturer notifications to NHTSA of
safety-related defects and failures to
comply with Federal Motor Vehicle
Safety Standards (FMVSS) in motor
vehicles and motor vehicle equipment,
as well as the provision of particular
information related to the ensuing
owner and dealer notifications and free
remedy campaigns that follow those
notifications. The sections of the Act
imposing these requirements include 49
U.S.C. 30118, 30119, 30120, and 30166.
Many of these requirements are
implemented through, and addressed
with more specificity in, 49 CFR part
573, Defect and Noncompliance
Responsibility and Reports (Part 573)
and 49 CFR 577, Defect and
Noncompliance Notification (Part 577).
Pursuant to the Act, motor vehicle
and motor vehicle equipment
manufacturers are obligated to notify,
and then provide various information
and documents to, NHTSA in the event
a safety defect or noncompliance with
FMVSS is identified in products they
manufactured. See 49 U.S.C. 30118(b)
and 49 CFR 573.6. Manufacturers are
further required to notify owners,
purchasers, dealers, and distributors
about the safety defect or
noncompliance. See 49 U.S.C. 30118(b),
30120(a); 49 CFR 577.7, 577.13.
Manufacturers are required to provide to
NHTSA copies of communications
pertaining to recall campaigns that they
issue to owners, purchasers, dealers,
and distributors. See 49 U.S.C. 30166(f);
49 CFR 573.6(c)(10).
Manufacturers are also required to file
with NHTSA a plan explaining how
they intend to reimburse owners and
purchasers who paid to have their
products remedied before being notified
of the safety defect or noncompliance,
and explain that plan in the
notifications they issue to owners and
purchasers about the safety defect or
noncompliance. See 49 U.S.C. 30120(d)
and 49 CFR 573.13. Manufacturers are
further required to keep lists of the
respective owners, purchasers, dealers,
distributors, lessors, and lessees of the
products determined to be defective or
noncompliant and involved in a recall
campaign, and are required to provide
NHTSA with a minimum of six

VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:00 Jun 11, 2019

Jkt 247001

quarterly reports reporting on the
progress of their recall campaigns. See
49 CFR 573.8 and 573.7, respectively.
The Act and Part 573 also contain
numerous information collection
requirements specific to tire recall and
remedy campaigns. These requirements
relate to the proper disposal of recalled
tires, including a requirement that the
manufacturer conducting the tire recall
submit a plan and provide specific
instructions to certain persons (such as
dealers and distributors) addressing that
disposal, and a requirement that those
persons report back to the manufacturer
certain deviations from the plan. See 49
U.S.C. 30120(d) and 49 CFR 573.6(c)(9).
The regulations also require that
manufacturers report to NHTSA
intentional and knowing sales or leases
of defective or noncompliant tires.
49 U.S.C. 30166(n) and its
implementing regulation found at 49
CFR 573.10 mandate that anyone who
knowingly and willfully sells or leases
for use on a motor vehicle a defective
tire or a tire that is not compliant with
FMVSS, and with actual knowledge that
the tire manufacturer has notified its
dealers of the defect or noncompliance
as required under the Act, is required to
report that sale or lease to NHTSA no
more than five working days after the
person to whom the tire was sold or
leased takes possession of it.
Pursuant to its safety authorities,
NHTSA is continuing its oversight of
recalls of unprecedented complexity
involving Takata air bag inflators.1
Under the Coordinated Remedy Program
established to address this major issue,
and the associated Coordinated Remedy
Order as amended on December 9, 2016
(the ‘‘ACRO’’), manufacturers issue
supplemental owner communications
utilizing non-traditional means.2 In this
notice, NHTSA both addresses
comments,3 and seeks further comment,
on its estimates of the supplemental
recall communications associated with
the Takata recalls.
Estimated Burden: NHTSA previously
estimated an annual burden of 36,070
hours associated with this collection (of
which 456 hours was contemplated for
conducting supplemental recall
communications under administrative
order to achieve completion of the
Takata recalls), $155,450,329 (of which
$27,836,329 is contemplated for
1 See generally ‘‘Takata Recall Spotlight,’’ https://
www.nhtsa.gov/equipment/takata-recall-spotlight.
2 See generally ‘‘Notice of Coordinated Remedy
Program Proceeding for the Replacement of Certain
Takata Air Bag Inflator,’’ available at https://
www.regulations.gov/docket?D=NHTSA-2015-0055.
3 NHTSA previously published a 30-day notice
for this collection on December 22, 2017 (82 FR
60789) on which OMB received comment.

PO 00000

Frm 00166

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

conducting supplemental recall
communications under administrative
order to achieve completion of the
Takata recalls), and 274 respondents per
year (19 vehicle manufacturers
conducting supplemental recall
communications under administrative
order to achieve completion of the
Takata recalls).4 Our prior estimates of
the burden hours and cost associated
with the requirements currently covered
by this information collection require
adjustment as follows.
Based on current information, we
estimate 249 distinct manufacturers
filing an average of 988 Part 573 Safety
Recall Reports each year. This is a
change from our previous estimate of
963 Part 573 Safety Recall Reports filed
by 274 manufacturers each year. In
addition, with reference to the metric
associated with NHTSA’s Vehicle
Identification Number (VIN) Look-up
Tool regulation, see 49 CFR 573.15, we
continue to estimate it takes the 17
major passenger-vehicle manufacturers
(those that produce more than 25,000
vehicles annually) additional burden
hours to complete these Reports to
NHTSA, as explored in more detail
below. See 82 FR 60789 (December 22,
2017). Between 2015 and 2018, the
major passenger-vehicle manufacturers
conducted an average of 316 recalls
annually.
We continue to estimate that
maintenance of the required owner,
purchaser, dealer, and distributors lists
requires 8 hours a year per
manufacturer. We also continue to
estimate it takes a major passengervehicle manufacturer 40 hours to
complete each notification report to
NHTSA, and it takes all other
manufacturers 4 hours. Accordingly, we
estimate the annual burden hours
related to the reporting to NHTSA of a
safety defect or noncompliance for the
17 major passenger vehiclemanufacturers to be 12,640 hours
annually (316 notices × 40 hours/
report), and that all other manufacturers
require a total of 2,688 hours annually
(672 notices × 4 hours/report) to file
their notices. Thus, the estimated
annual burden hours related to the
reporting to NHTSA of a safety defect or
noncompliance is 17,320 hours (12,640
hours + 2,688 hours) + (249 MFRs × 8
hours to maintain purchaser lists).5
We continue to estimate that an
additional 40 hours will be needed to
account for major passenger-vehicle
manufacturers adding details to Part 573
4 See

82 FR 60789, 60790 (December 22, 2017).
more information about how we derived
these and certain other estimates, please see 81 FR
70269 (October 11, 2016).
5 For

E:\FR\FM\12JNN1.SGM

12JNN1

jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 113 / Wednesday, June 12, 2019 / Notices
Safety Recall Reports relating to the
intended schedule for notifying its
dealers and distributors, and tailoring
its notifications to dealers and
distributors in accordance with the
requirements of 49 CFR 577.13. An
additional 2 hours will be needed to
account for this obligation in other
manufacturers’ Safety Recall Reports.
This burden is estimated at 13,984
hours annually (672 notices × 2 hours/
notification) + (316 notices × 40 hours/
notification).
49 U.S.C. 30166(f) requires
manufacturers to provide to the Agency
copies of all communications regarding
defects and noncompliances sent to
owners, purchasers, and dealerships.
Manufacturers must index these
communications by the year, make, and
model of the vehicle as well as provide
a concise summary of the subject of the
communication. We continue to
estimate this burden requires 3 hours for
each vehicle recall for the 17 major
passenger-vehicle manufacturers, and
30 minutes for all other manufacturers
for each vehicle recall. This totals an
estimated 1,284 hours annually (316
recalls × 3 hours for the 17 major
passenger-vehicle manufacturers) + (672
recalls × .5 for all other manufacturers).
In the event a manufacturer supplied
the defective or noncompliant product
to independent dealers through
independent distributors, that
manufacturer is required to include in
its notifications to those distributors an
instruction that the distributors are then
to provide copies of the manufacturer’s
notification of the defect or
noncompliance to all known
distributors or retail outlets further
down the distribution chain within five
working days. See 49 CFR
577.7(c)(2)(iv). As a practical matter,
this requirement would only apply to
equipment manufacturers, since vehicle
manufacturers generally sell and lease
vehicles through a dealer network, and
not through independent distributors.
We believe our previous estimate of 87
equipment recalls per year needs to be
adjusted to 91 equipment recalls per
year to better reflect recent data. We
have estimated the burden associated
with these notifications (identifying
retail outlets, making copies of the
manufacturer’s notice, and mailing) to
be 5 hours per recall campaign.
Assuming an average of 3 distributors
per equipment item, which is a liberal
estimate given that many equipment
manufacturers do not use independent
distributors, the total number of burden
hours associated with this third-party
notification requirement is
approximately 1,365 hours per year (91
recalls × 3 distributors × 5 hours).

VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:00 Jun 11, 2019

Jkt 247001

As for the burden linked with a
manufacturer’s preparation of and
notification concerning its
reimbursement for pre-notification
remedies, we continue to estimate that
the preparation of a reimbursement plan
takes approximately 4 hours annually.
We also continue to estimate that an
additional 1.5 hours per year is spent by
the 17 major passenger-vehicle
manufacturers adapting the plan to
particular defect and noncompliance
notifications to NHTSA and adding
tailored language about the plan to a
particular safety recall’s owner
notification letters, while an additional
.5 hours per year is spent on this task
by all other manufacturers. And we
continue to estimate that an additional
12 hours annually is spent
disseminating plan information, for a
total of 4,794 annual burden hours ((249
MFRs × 4 hours to prepare plan) + (316
recalls × 1.5 hours tailoring plan for
each recall) + (672 recalls × .5 hours) +
(249 MFRs × 12 hours to disseminate
plan information)).
The Safety Act and 49 CFR part 573
also contain numerous information
collection requirements specific to tire
recall and remedy campaigns, as well as
a statutory and regulatory reporting
requirement that anyone who
knowingly and intentionally sells or
leases a defective or noncompliant tire
notify NHTSA of that activity.
Manufacturers are required to include
specific information related to tire
disposal in the notifications they
provide NHTSA concerning
identification of a safety defect or
noncompliance with FMVSS in their
tires, as well as in the notifications they
issue to their dealers or other tire outlets
participating in the recall campaign. See
49 CFR 573.6(c)(9). We believe our
previous estimate of 12 tire recalls per
year needs to be adjusted to 11 tire
recalls per year to better reflect recent
data. We continue to estimate that the
inclusion of this additional information
will require an additional two hours of
effort beyond the subtotal above
associated with non-tire recall
campaigns. This additional effort
consists of one hour for the NHTSA
notification and one hour for the dealer
notification for a total of 22 burden
hours (11 tire recalls a year × 2 hours
per recall).
Manufacturer-owned or controlled
dealers are required to notify the
manufacturer and provide certain
information should they deviate from
the manufacturer’s disposal plan.
Consistent with our previous analysis,
we continue to ascribe zero burden
hours to this requirement since to date
no such reports have been provided,

PO 00000

Frm 00167

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

27397

and our original expectation that dealers
would comply with manufacturers’
plans has proven accurate.
Accordingly, we estimate 22 burden
hours a year will be spent complying
with the tire recall campaign
requirements found in 49 CFR
573.6(c)(9).
The agency continues to estimate 1
burden hour annually will be spent
preparing and submitting reports of a
defective or noncompliant tire being
intentionally sold or leased under 49
U.S.C. 30166(n) and its implementing
regulation at 49 CFR 573.10.
We continue to expect that nine
vehicle manufacturers, who did not
operate VIN-based recalls lookup
systems prior to August 2013, incur
certain recurring burdens on an annual
basis. We continue to estimate that 100
burden hours will be spent on system
and database administrator support.
These 100 burden hours include:
Backup data management and
monitoring; database management,
updates, and log management; and data
transfer, archiving, quality assurance,
and cleanup procedures. We continue to
estimate another 100 burden hours will
be incurred on web/application
developer support. These burdens
include: Operating system and security
patch management; application/web
server management; and application
server system and log files management.
We continue to estimate these burdens
will total 1,800 hours each year (9 MFRs
× 200 hours). We also continue to
estimate the recurring costs of these
burden hours will be $30,000 per
manufacturer.6 Furthermore, we
continue to estimate that the total cost
to the industry from these recurring
expenses will total $270,000, on an
annual basis (9 MFRs × $30,000).
Changes to 49 CFR part 573 in 2013
required 27 manufacturers to update
each recalled vehicle’s repair status no
less than every 7 days, for 15 years from
the date the VIN is known to be
included in the recall. This ongoing
requirement to update the status of a
VIN for 15 years continues to add a
recurring burden on top of the one-time
burden to implement and operate these
online search tools. We continue to
estimate that 8 affected motorcycle
manufacturers will make recalled VINs
available for an average of 2 recalls each
year and 19 affected passenger-vehicle
manufacturers will make recalled VINs
available for an average of 8 recalls each
year. We believe it will take no more
6 $8,000 (for data center hosting for the physical
server) + $12,000 (for system and database
administrator support) + $10,000 (for web/
application developer support) = $30,000.

E:\FR\FM\12JNN1.SGM

12JNN1

jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES

27398

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 113 / Wednesday, June 12, 2019 / Notices

than 1 hour, and potentially less with
automated systems, to update the VIN
status of vehicles that have been
remedied under the manufacturer’s
remedy program. We continue to
estimate this will require 8,736 burden
hours per year (1 hour × 2 recalls × 52
weeks × 8 MFRs + 1 hour × 8 recalls ×
52 weeks × 19 MFRs) to support the
requirement to update the recalls
completion status of each VIN in a recall
at least weekly for 15 years.
As the number of Part 573 Recall
Reports has increased in recent years, so
has the number of quarterly reports that
track the completion of safety recalls.
Our previous estimate of 4,498 quarterly
reports received annually is now revised
upwards to 5,512 quarter reports
received annually. We continue to
estimate it takes manufacturers 1 hour
to gather the pertinent information for
each quarterly report, and 10 additional
hours for the 17 major passenger-vehicle
manufacturers to submit electronic
reports. We therefore now estimate that
the quarterly reporting burden pursuant
to Part 573 totals 5,682 hours ((5,512
quarterly reports × 1 hour/report) + (17
MFRs × 10 hours for electronic
submission)).
We continue to estimate a small
burden of 2 hours annually in order to
set up a manufacturer’s online recalls
portal account with the pertinent
contact information and maintaining/
updating their account information as
needed. We estimate this will require a
total of 498 hours annually (2 hours ×
249 MFRs).
We continue to estimate that 20
percent of Part 573 reports will involve
a change or addition regarding recall
components, and that at two hours per
amended report, this totals 396 burden
hours per year (988 recalls × .20 = 193
recalls; 198 × 2 = 396 hours).
As to the requirement that
manufacturers notify NHTSA in the
event of a bankruptcy, we expect this
notification to take an estimated 2 hours
to draft and submit to NHTSA. We
continue to estimate that only 10
manufacturers might submit such a
notice to NHTSA each year, so we
calculate the total burden at 20 hours
(10 MFRs × 2 hours).
We continue to estimate that it takes
the 17 major passenger-vehicle
manufacturers an average of 11 hours to
draft their notification letters, submit
them to NHTSA for review, and then
finalize them for mailing to their
affected owners and purchasers. We also
continue to estimate it takes 8 hours for
all other manufacturers to perform this
task. Accordingly, we estimate that the
49 CFR part 577 requirements result in
8,852 burden hours annually (11 hours

VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:00 Jun 11, 2019

Jkt 247001

per recall × 316 recalls per year) + (8
hours per recall × 672 recalls per year).
The burden estimate associated with
the regulation that requires interim
owner notifications within 60 days of
filing a Part 573 Safety Recall Report
must be revised upward. We previously
calculated that about 12 percent of past
recalls require an interim notification
mailing, but recent trends show that 13
percent of recalls require an interim
owner notification mailing. We continue
to estimate the preparation of an interim
notification can take up to 10 hours. We
therefore estimate that 1,250 burden
hours are associated with the 60-day
interim notification requirement (963
recalls × .13 = 125 recalls; 125 recalls
times 10 hours per recall = 1,250 hours).
As for costs associated with notifying
owners and purchasers of recalls, to
reflect an increase in postage rates, we
are revising our estimate of the cost of
first-class mail notification to $1.53 per
notification, on average. This cost
estimate includes the costs of printing
and mailing, as well as the costs vehicle
manufacturers may pay to third-party
vendors to acquire the names and
addresses of the current registered
owners from state and territory
departments of motor vehicles. In
reviewing recent recall figures, we
determined that an estimated 51.4
million letters are mailed yearly totaling
$78,642,000 ($1.53 per letter ×
51,400,000 letters). The requirement in
49 CFR part 577 for a manufacturer to
notify their affected customers within
60 days would add an additional
$10,223,460 (51,400,000 letters × .13
requiring interim owner notifications =
6,682,000 letters; 6,682,000 × $1.53 =
$10,023,000). In total, we estimate that
the current 49 CFR part 577
requirements cost manufacturers a total
of $88,865,460 annually ($78,642,000
for owner notification letters +
$10,223,460 for interim notification
letters = $88,865,460).
As discussed above, to address the
scope and complexity of the Takata
recalls, NHTSA issued the ACRO,
which requires affected vehicle
manufacturers to conduct supplemental
owner notification efforts in
coordination with NHTSA and the
Independent Monitor of Takata. On
December 23, 2016, the Monitor, in
consultation with NHTSA, issued
Coordinated Communications
Recommendations for vehicle owner
outreach (‘‘CCRs’’), which includes a
recommendation that vehicle
manufacturers provide at least one form
of consumer outreach per month for
vehicles in a launched recall campaign
(i.e., a recall where parts are available)
until the vehicle is remedied (unless

PO 00000

Frm 00168

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

otherwise accounted for as scrapped,
stolen, exported, or otherwise
unreachable under certain procedures in
the ACRO). See CCRs ¶ 1(b); ACRO
¶¶ 45–46. The Monitor also
recommended that manufacturers
utilize at least three non-traditional
means of communication (e.g.,
postcards; email; telephone calls; text
message; social media) as part of their
overall outreach strategy. See CCRs
¶ 1(a). And the Monitor recommended
including certain content in these
communications, including certain
safety-risk information. See id. ¶ 2. If a
vehicle manufacturer does not wish to
follow the Monitor’s recommendations,
the ACRO permits the manufacturer to
propose an alternative communication
strategy to NHTSA and the Monitor.
Two comments were submitted after
the previous publication of the 30-day
notice and request for comment on the
renewal of this information collection.
See NHTSA Docket 2016–0065. One
commenter submitted only a general
comment with no reference to the
substance of the notice. The other
comment, filed by the Alliance of
Automobile Manufacturers and the
Association of Global Automakers
(hereinafter ‘‘A&G’’), responded to
several facets of the notice.
In brief summary, A&G commented
that it believes the investigatory
exception to the Paperwork Reduction
Act (PRA) does not apply to the Takata
Coordinated Remedy Order—
characterizing any relevant investigation
as one against Takata, not the affected
automakers—and that NHTSA should
therefore account for additional cost
burdens under the ACRO beyond the
monthly outreach recommended under
the CCRs. See Comments at 3–4. A&G
further commented that it believes
NHTSA should supplement the record
with the following: additional costburden analysis, because NHTSA’s
estimate ‘‘underappreciates’’ what the
ACRO contemplates; a Part B
submission to account for Independent
Monitor-conducted surveys and other
activities; and additional data on the
‘‘practical utility’’ of supplemental nontraditional outreach. See Comments at
4–6. A&G also commented that it
disagrees with NHTSA’s discounting of
its cost estimates based on recent
vehicle manufacturer settlement
agreements in multi-district litigation
proceedings because the ACRO predates
MDL settlement obligations ‘‘and would
have existed in the absence of the
litigation settlements.’’ Comments at 7.
NHTSA has carefully considered
these comments and recognizes the
challenges involved in the Takata
recalls, particularly with respect to

E:\FR\FM\12JNN1.SGM

12JNN1

jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 113 / Wednesday, June 12, 2019 / Notices
estimating per-VIN outreach costs—
populations change and, with those
changes, the methods necessary and
appropriate to engage those populations
also change. See Comments at 4. Before
modifying the approach to its estimates,
NHTSA would benefit of from the
consideration of any additional
information that may be available, and
would invite further public comment on
such estimates. The Agency also
recognizes and appreciates A&G’s
additional comments and concerns as
described above, and similarly invites
further public comment on the issues
A&G identifies.
To account for the progression of the
recalls since its last notice, NHTSA is
revising its previous estimates
associated with this part of the
collection. NHTSA continues to
estimate a yearly average of 19
manufacturers will be issuing monthly
supplemental communications over the
next three years pursuant to the ACRO
and the CCRs. Manufacturers may
satisfy the CCRs through third-party
vendors (which have been utilized by
many manufacturers), in-house
strategies, or some combination thereof.
NHTSA estimates the cost for
supplemental communications at $2.00
per VIN per month.
The volume of outreach required by
the ACRO and the CCRs (and the costs
associated with that outreach) is a
function of the number of unrepaired
vehicles that are in a launched
campaign and are not otherwise
accounted for as scrapped, stolen,
exported, or otherwise unreachable. The
schedule in Paragraph 35 of the ACRO
delineates the expected remedy
completion rate, by quarter, of vehicles
in a launched remedy campaign.
Utilizing these variables, we now
estimate an initial annualized cost over
the next three years of $203,776,494 per
year, with an annualized discount of
$86,724,071 to account for outreach
conducted pursuant to the MDL
settlement agreements by six vehicle
manufacturers, for a net annualized cost
of $117,052,423. NHTSA continues to
estimate that manufacturers will take an
average of 2 hours each month drafting
or customizing supplemental recall
communications utilizing nontraditional means, submitting them to
NHTSA for review, and finalizing them
to send to affected owners and
purchasers. NHTSA therefore estimates
that 456 burden hours annually are
associated with issuing these
supplemental recall communications:
12 months × 2 hours per month × 19
manufacturers = 456 hours.
Because of the forgoing burden
estimates, we are revising the burden

VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:00 Jun 11, 2019

Jkt 247001

estimate associated with this collection.
The 49 CFR part 573 and 49 CFR part
577 requirements found in today’s
notice will require 64,510 hours each
year. Additionally, manufacturers
impacted by 49 CFR part 573 and 49
CFR part 577 requirements will incur a
recurring annual cost estimated at
$89,135,460 total. The burden estimate
in this collection contemplated for
conducting supplemental recall
communications under administrative
order to achieve completion of the
Takata recalls is 456 hours each year.
Additionally, that administrative order
contemplates impacted manufacturers
incurring an annual cost estimated at
$117,052,423. Therefore, in total, we
estimate the burden associated with this
collection to be 64,966 hours each year,
with a recurring annual cost estimated
at $204,175,423. NHTSA welcomes
further comment and data on these
estimates.
Estimated Number of Respondents—
NHTSA estimates that there will be
approximately 249 manufacturers per
year filing defect or noncompliance
reports and completing the other
information collection responsibilities
associated with those filings. NHTSA
estimates there will be an average of 19
manufacturers each year conducting
supplemental nontraditional monthly
outreach pursuant to administrative
order in an enforcement action
associated with the Takata recall.
Jeffrey Mark Giuseppe,
Associate Administrator for Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2019–12313 Filed 6–11–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Office of Foreign Assets Control
Notice of OFAC Sanctions Actions
Office of Foreign Assets
Control, Treasury.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:

The U.S. Department of the
Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets
Control (OFAC) is publishing the names
of one or more persons that have been
placed on OFAC’s Specially Designated
Nationals and Blocked Persons List
based on OFAC’s determination that one
or more applicable legal criteria were
satisfied. All property and interests in
property subject to U.S. jurisdiction of
these persons are blocked, and U.S.
persons are generally prohibited from
engaging in transactions with them.
DATES: See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section.
SUMMARY:

PO 00000

Frm 00169

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

27399

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

OFAC: Associate Director for Global
Targeting, tel.: 202–622–2420; Assistant
Director for Sanctions Compliance &
Evaluation, tel.: 202–622–2490;
Assistant Director for Licensing, tel.:
202–622–2480; or the Department of the
Treasury’s Office of the General
Counsel: Office of the Chief Counsel
(Foreign Assets Control), tel.: 202–622–
2410.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Electronic Availability
The Specially Designated Nationals
and Blocked Persons List and additional
information concerning OFAC sanctions
programs are available on OFAC’s
website (www.treas.gov/ofac).
Notice of OFAC Actions
On June 7, 2019, OFAC determined
that the property and interests in
property subject to U.S. jurisdiction of
the following persons are blocked under
the relevant sanctions authorities listed
below.
Entities
1. PERSIAN GULF PETROCHEMICAL
INDUSTRY CO. (a.k.a. PERSIAN GULF
PETROCHEMICAL INDUSTRIES; a.k.a.
PERSIAN GULF PETROCHEMICAL
INDUSTRIES CO. PLC; a.k.a. PERSIAN GULF
PETROCHEMICAL INDUSTRY; a.k.a.
PERSIAN GULF PETROCHEMICAL
INDUSTRY COMPANY; a.k.a. PGPIC), No.
38, Avenue Karim Khan Zand Blvd., Hafte
Tir Square, Tehran 1584893313, Iran; No. 38,
Karim Khan Zand Street, Haft Tir Square,
Tehran 1584851181, Iran; website
www.pgpic.ir; Additional Sanctions
Information—Subject to Secondary
Sanctions; Business Registration Number
89243 (Iran) [NPWMD] [IFSR] (Linked To:
KHATAM OL ANBIA GHARARGAH
SAZANDEGI NOOH).
Designated pursuant to section 1(a)(iii) of
Executive Order 13382 of June 28, 2005,
‘‘Blocking Property of Weapons of Mass
Destruction Proliferators and Their
Supporters’’ (‘‘E.O. 13382’’), for having
provided, or attempted to provide, financial,
material, technological or other support for,
or goods or services in support of, KHATAM
AL–ANBYA, a person whose property and
interests in property are blocked pursuant to
E.O. 13382.
2. ARVAND PETROCHEMICAL
COMPANY, East 9th Floor, Building No. 46,
Karimkhan Zand Boulevard, Near by Ansar
Bank, Hafte-E-Tir Square, Tehran
1584893117, Iran; Site 3, Mahshahr
1584851181, Iran; website www.arvandpvc.ir;
Additional Sanctions Information—Subject
to Secondary Sanctions; Business
Registration Number 6494 (Iran) [NPWMD]
[IFSR] (Linked To: PERSIAN GULF
PETROCHEMICAL INDUSTRY CO.).
Designated pursuant to section 1(a)(iv) of
E.O. 13382, for being owned or controlled by
the PERSIAN GULF PETROCHEMICAL
INDUSTRY CO., a person whose property

E:\FR\FM\12JNN1.SGM

12JNN1