30-day FRN

13360

Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Notices

jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1

of the key from the ignition switch
when the vehicle is not being used.
As required in section 543.6(a)(3)(v),
Subaru provided information on the
reliability and durability of its proposed
device. To ensure reliability and
durability of the device, Subaru
conducted tests based on its own
specified standards and provided a
detailed list of the tests conducted.
Subaru stated that it believes that its
device is reliable and durable because it
complied with its own specific design
standards and the antitheft device is
installed on other vehicle lines for
which the agency has granted a partsmarking exemption.
Subaru stated that its theft rates have
been low per the National Insurance
Crime Bureau’s 2019 report on
America’s 10 most stolen vehicles.
However, Subaru compared its
proposed device to other Subaru
antitheft devices that NHTSA has
determined to be as effective in
reducing and deterring motor vehicle
theft as would compliance with the
parts-marking requirements.
Specifically, Subaru stated that the theft
rate of the MY 2008 Impreza (not parts
marked, standard engine immobilizer)
decreased by almost 51% as compared
to the MY 2007 Impreza (parts marked
with optional engine immobilizer).
Subaru stated that the antitheft system
included on the BRZ vehicle line is the
same system employed on the Subaru
Ascent car line, for which NHTSA
determined that the system was likely as
effective in reducing and deterring
motor vehicle theft as compliance with
the parts-marking requirements of the
theft prevention standard.7
Subaru also stated that the National
Crime Information Center’s (NCIC) theft
data showed that there was a 70%
reduction in theft experienced when
comparing the MY 1997 Ford Mustang
vehicle thefts (with immobilizers) to MY
1995 Ford Mustang vehicle thefts
(without immobilizers). On the basis of
the above and other cited comparisons,
Subaru has concluded that its proposed
immobilizer system is no less effective
than those devices installed on lines for
which NHTSA has already granted full
exemptions.
III. Decision To Grant the Petition
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49
CFR 543.8(b), the agency grants a
petition for exemption from the partsmarking requirements of part 541, either
in whole or in part, if it determines that,
based upon substantial evidence, the
standard equipment antitheft device is
likely to be as effective in reducing and
7 82

FR 57650 (Dec. 06, 2017).

VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:44 Mar 08, 2022

Jkt 256001

deterring motor vehicle theft as
compliance with the parts-marking
requirements of part 541 or if deemed
approved under 49 U.S.C. 33106(d).
NHTSA finds that Subaru has provided
adequate reasons for its belief that the
antitheft device for its vehicle line is
likely to be as effective in reducing and
deterring motor vehicle theft as
compliance with the parts-marking
requirements of the theft prevention
standard. This conclusion is based on
the information Subaru provided about
its antitheft device.
The agency concludes that Subaru’s
antitheft device will provide the five
types of performance features listed in
section 543.6(a)(3): Promoting
activation; attracting attention to the
efforts of unauthorized persons to enter
or operate a vehicle by means other than
a key; preventing defeat or
circumvention of the device by
unauthorized persons; preventing
operation of the vehicle by
unauthorized entrants; and ensuring the
reliability and durability of the device.
The agency notes that 49 CFR part
541, Appendix A–1, identifies those
lines that are exempted from the theft
prevention standard for a given model
year. 49 CFR 543.8(f) contains
publication requirements incident to the
disposition of all part 543 petitions.
Advanced listing, including the release
of future product nameplates, the
beginning model year for which the
petition is granted and a general
description of the antitheft device is
necessary in order to notify law
enforcement agencies of new vehicle
lines exempted from the parts-marking
requirements of the theft prevention
standard.
If Subaru decides not to use the
exemption for its requested vehicle line,
the manufacturer must formally notify
the agency. If such a decision is made,
the line must be fully marked as
required by 49 CFR 541.5 and 541.6
(marking of major component parts and
replacement parts).
NHTSA notes that if a manufacturer
to which an exemption has been granted
wishes in the future to modify the
device on which the exemption is
based, the company may have to submit
a petition to modify the exemption.
Section 543.8(d) states that a part 543
exemption applies only to vehicles that
belong to a line exempted under this
part and equipped with the antitheft
device on which the line’s exemption is
based. Further, section 543.10(c)(2)
provides for the submission of petitions
‘‘to modify an exemption to permit the
use of an antitheft device similar to but

PO 00000

Frm 00110

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

differing from the one specified in the
exemption.’’ 8
For the foregoing reasons, the agency
hereby announces a grant in full of
Subaru’s petition for exemption for the
BRZ vehicle line from the parts-marking
requirements of 49 CFR part 541,
beginning with its MY 2023 vehicles.
Issued under authority delegated in 49 CFR
1.95 and 501.8.
Raymond R. Posten,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2022–04928 Filed 3–8–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2021–0009]

Agency Information Collection
Activities; Submission to the Office of
Management and Budget for Review
and Approval; Uniform Procedures for
State Highway Safety Grant Programs
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice and request for
comments on a reinstatement of a
previously approved information
collection.
AGENCY:

In compliance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA), this notice announces that the
Information Collection Request (ICR)
abstracted below will be submitted to
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and approval. The ICR
describes the nature of the information
collection and its expected burden. This
is a request for approval for
reinstatement of a previously-approved
collection of information for NHTSA’s
Highway Grant Program, which
includes State Highway Safety Program
grants, the National Priority Safety
Program grants, and a separate grant on
racial profiling data collection. The
purpose of the information collection is
to collect information necessary for
NHTSA to issue grants to States. To
receive grants, a State must submit a

SUMMARY:

8 The agency wishes to minimize the
administrative burden that section 543.10(c)(2)
could place on exempted vehicle manufacturers
and itself. The agency did not intend in drafting
part 543 to require the submission of a modification
petition for every change to the components or
design of an antitheft device. The significance of
many such changes could be de minimis. Therefore,
NHTSA suggests that if a manufacturer with an
exemption contemplates making any changes, the
effects of which might be characterized as de
minimis, it should consult the agency before
preparing and submitting a petition to modify.

E:\FR\FM\09MRN1.SGM

09MRN1

jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1

Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Notices
Highway Safety Plan (HSP) that
supports its qualifications for receiving
grant funds. Specifically, the HSP
consists of information on the highway
safety planning process, performance
report, performance plan, problem
identification, highway safety
countermeasure strategies, planned
activities and funding amounts,
certifications and assurances, and
application materials that cover Section
405 grants and the reauthorized Section
1906 grant. A Federal Register Notice
with a 60-day comment period soliciting
comments on the following information
collection was published on February 9,
2021. NHTSA received three comments.
A summary of the comments and
NHTSA’s response to those comments is
provided below.
DATES: Comments must be submitted on
or before April 8, 2022.
ADDRESSES: Written comments and
recommendations for the proposed
information collection, including
suggestions for reducing burden, should
be submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget at
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.
To find this particular information
collection, select ‘‘Currently under
Review—Open for Public Comment’’ or
use the search function.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
additional information or access to
background documents, contact Barbara
Sauers, Regional Operations and
Program Delivery, NRO–011, National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration,
U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington,
DC, 20590; Telephone: 202–366–0144.
Please identify the relevant collection of
information by referring to its OMB
Control Number.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the
PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), a Federal
agency must receive approval from the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) before it collects certain
information from the public and a
person is not required to respond to a
collection of information by a Federal
agency unless the collection displays a
valid OMB control number. In
compliance with these requirements,
this notice announces that the following
information collection request will be
submitted to OMB.
Title: Uniform Procedures for State
Highway Safety Grant Programs.
OMB Control Number: 2127–0730.
Form Number: None.
Type of Request: Reinstatement of a
previously approved information
collection.
Type of Review Requested: Regular.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:44 Mar 08, 2022

Jkt 256001

Length of Approval Requested: Three
years from date of approval.
Summary of the Collection of
Information:
The Fixing America’s Surface
Transportation Act (FAST), Public Law
114–94, authorizes the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration
(NHTSA) to issue highway safety grants
to States under Chapter 4 of Title 23,
U.S.C. Specifically, these grant
programs include the Highway Safety
Program grants (23 U.S.C. 402 or Section
402), the National Priority Safety
Program grants (23 U.S.C. 405 or Section
405) and a separate grant on racial
profiling data collection contained in a
previous authorization that was revised
and restored under the FAST Act
(Public Law 109–59, Sec. 1906 or
Section 1906, as amended by Sec. 4011,
Public Law 114–94).
For all of these grants, as directed in
statute, NHTSA uses a consolidated
application process that relies on the
Highway Safety Plan (HSP) that States 1
submit under the Section 402 program
as a single application. The information
required to be submitted for these grants
includes the HSP consisting of
information on the highway safety
planning process, performance report,
performance plan, problem
identification, highway safety
countermeasure strategies, projects and
funding amounts, certifications and
assurances, and application materials
that cover Section 405 grants and the
reauthorized Section 1906 grant.2 States
also must submit an annual report
evaluating their progress in achieving
performance targets. In addition, as part
of the statutory criteria for Section 405
grants covering the areas of occupant
protection, traffic safety information
system improvement and impaired
driving countermeasures, States may be
required to receive assessments of their
State programs in order to receive a
grant.3 States must provide information
1 While

the grant programs are available for the
50 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico,
U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands,
and the Bureau of Indian Affairs on behalf of the
Indian Country, NHTSA will refer to the
respondents to the Uniform Procedures for State
Highway Safety Grant Programs information
collection as ‘‘States.’’
2 Section 405 grants cover the following:
Occupant Protection Grants; State Traffic Safety
Information System Improvements Grants; Impaired
Driving Countermeasures Grants (including
Alcohol-Ignition Interlock Grants and 24–7 Sobriety
Program Grants); Distracted Driving Grants;
Motorcyclist Safety Grants; State Graduated Driver
Licensing Incentive Grants; and Nonmotorized
Safety Grants. Section 1906 is a separate racial
profiling data collection grant.
3 Under occupant protection grants, one criterion
that a State with a lower belt use rate may use to
receive a grant is to complete an assessment of its

PO 00000

Frm 00111

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

13361

and respond to questions as part of the
assessment process.
Consistent with the statute, NHTSA
has implemented a final rule that
creates uniform procedures for States to
apply for grant funds (83 FR 3466,
January 25, 2018). These procedures
specify the information that is required
to be submitted to receive a grant and
the type of information required to
verify performance under the grants.
As indicated above, States may be
required to receive an assessment of
certain covered programs in order to be
eligible for some grants under Section
405. Separate from these requirements,
States also may request assessments in
these areas at their discretion. NHTSA
uses two different assessment
approaches based on the traffic safety
area covered. For occupant protection
and impaired driving, assessments are
based on NHTSA’s Uniform Guidelines
for State Highway Safety Programs,
which are required by Congress and
periodically updated through a process
that seeks public comment.4 State
programs are assessed against these
uniform guidelines by a team of subject
matter experts. The assessment team
produces a final report with
recommendations on how the State can
improve the effectiveness of its program.
As part of the process, States provide
written materials in response to requests
from the assessment team and
participate in a comprehensive
interview process. For traffic safety
information systems, States respond to
questions based on NHTSA’s Traffic
Records Program Assessment Advisory
(DOT HS 812 601), which describes an
ideal traffic records system. The
questions cover nine topical areas and
examine how well a State plans,
collects, manages, and integrates
information from several State traffic
records systems.5 Responses are
occupant protection program once every three years
(23 U.S.C. 405(b)(3)(B)(ii)(VI)(aa)); and another
criterion is a comprehensive occupant protection
program that includes a program assessment
conducted every five years as one of its elements
(23 U.S.C. 405(b)(3)(B)(ii)(V)(aa); 23 CFR
1300.21(e)(5)(i)). Under traffic safety system
information system improvement grants, a State
must have an assessment of its highway safety data
and traffic records system once every 5 years in
order to receive a grant (23 U.S.C. 405(c)(3)(E)).
Under impaired driving countermeasure grants, a
State with high average impaired driving fatality
rates must have an assessment of its impaired
driving program once every 3 years in order to
receive a grant. (23 U.S.C. 405(d)(3)(C)(i)(I)).
4 The Uniform Guidelines for State Highway
Safety Programs are available online at https://
one.nhtsa.gov/nhtsa/whatsup/tea21/
tea21programs/index.htm.
5 The Traffic Records Program Assessment
Advisory is available online at https://
crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/
ViewPublication/812601.

E:\FR\FM\09MRN1.SGM

09MRN1

13362

Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Notices

evaluated by subject matter experts, and
a final report is provided to the State
with recommendations for
improvement.
Description of the Need for the
Information and Proposed Use of the
Information:
As noted above, the statute provides
that the HSP is the application basis for
grants each fiscal year. The information
is necessary to determine whether a
State satisfies the Federal criteria for
grant awards. The annual report tracks
progress in achieving the aims of the
grant program. The information is
necessary to verify performance under
the grants and to provide a basis for
improvement. As specified in statute,
States may be required to receive an
assessment of certain covered programs.
In other instances, States may opt to
receive an assessment in order to use
that assessment as one of several
options to qualify for a grant under
Section 405. The information provided
by a State allows subject matter experts
to provide recommendations for the
purpose of improving the covered areas.
Public Comments
A Federal Register notice with a 60day comment period soliciting public
comments on the information collection
was published on February 9, 2021 (86
FR 8832). NHTSA received three
comments from the Governors Highway
Safety Association (GHSA), the
Tennessee Highway Safety Office, and
an anonymous commenter. Comments
addressed the timing of the Highway
Safety Program applications and Annual
Report, estimated burden hours, and the
inclusion of other activities in the
burden estimates.
General
In general, commenters indicated
support for the agency’s collection of
information and its use of a single,
unified annual Highway Safety Plan.
Commenters also included other topics
unrelated to this PRA which will be
addressed separately.

jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1

Timing of Highway Safety Plan
Application and Annual Report
Commenters raised issues with the
timing of the HSP application.
Tennessee commented that the
‘‘deadline is so early in the year’’ and
that ‘‘States need time to look at the
previous year’s uncertified FARS data
(State data) to determine issue areas to
address for the upcoming grant year and
the most current certified FARS data.’’
Furthermore, the comment noted that
the deadline of July 1 necessitates the
use of amendments to supply

VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:44 Mar 08, 2022

Jkt 256001

information not available at the time of
the application.
While NHTSA recognizes the
potential difficulty in submitting
applications by the July 1 application
date, NHTSA does not have discretion
to adjust the application deadline. The
July 1 application date is set forth in
statute.6 However, NHTSA would like
to reiterate that while FARS data is to
be used to report progress on the core
performance targets, States can use
other sources of data to help determine
their targets and priority problem areas.
It is correct that States that do not know
which projects will be funded at the
time of application will need to follow
up by providing a list of projects in an
amendment to their application;
however, States can provide this list in
any format they choose as long as the
four required data elements are
included (project agreement number,
subrecipient, amount of federal funds,
and eligible use of funds). While
NHTSA believes that this type of list is
common and exists as a normal business
practice in most States (and the majority
of States (68%) provided a list with
their 2021 application) we agree that
extra time may be needed. Accordingly,
we have adjusted our estimated burden
hours (see below).
Commenters also raised concerns
regarding the timing of the annual
report. GHSA commented that it is
challenging to meet the due date for the
annual report due to it coinciding with
year-end closeout and the winter
holidays. They also noted the new
option in the revised 2 CFR 200 7 that
allows NHTSA to extend the closeout
and reporting deadline from 90 days to
120 days beginning with FY22. The
timing of the annual report is set forth
in NHTSA’s regulation at 23 CFR
1300.35 and was created to align with
the 90-day government-wide timing
requirements that existed at the time our
regulation was published in 2018. As
GHSA notes, the government-wide
regulation has since been updated to
allow a longer, 120-day time frame for
closeout and reporting; NHTSA will
take this into consideration when we
next revise our own implementing
regulation. Another commenter said that
automating the annual report could help
reduce the burden.
Estimated Burden Hours
Both GHSA and the anonymous
commenter stated that they believe
NHTSA under-estimated the burden of
time involved in developing the HSP
6 23

U.S.C. 402(k)(2).
85 FR 49506 (Aug. 13, 2020), effective
November 12, 2020.
7 See

PO 00000

Frm 00112

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

and annual report. One State that
supplied comments to GHSA suggested
that preparing the HSP, including both
the Section 402 and 405 grant programs,
likely takes over 400 hours. In support,
GHSA commented that ‘‘HSP
development involves not just planning
within the SHSO but interaction with
other partners as well to select projects
and develop agreements.’’ GHSA
acknowledged, however, the difficulty
of developing an estimate across States
since the number will ‘‘differ
significantly from State to State.’’ They
added that States do not track time
spent meeting these requirements and
‘‘are involved in preparing HSPs and
Annual Reports intermittently over time
in addition to implementing programs
and performing other duties.’’
NHTSA agrees that an average may
not be reflective of the experience of
some States. While our initial burden
hour estimate is not too dissimilar from
GHSA’s (380 vs 400), after meeting to
discuss the details of their comments,
we agree that more time should be
added to account for HSP planning
activities which were not part of our
original estimate. We agree that working
with partners is necessary for planning
and carrying out the program, but these
activities are also normal every-day
program planning and operation
activities that are not solely needed for
the application process. In response to
GHSA’s comment and after further
review of the issues, we have increased
the estimate for the HSP application to
410 hours. We also revised our estimate
for completing the annual report. One
State reported to GHSA that it could
take 100–120 hours. While we believe
this estimate is high, we have increased
our estimate to 80 hours, which is an
increase of 40 hours from our original
estimate.
GHSA also noted that the time burden
required for an assessment is significant.
While no commenters provided any
estimates for how long assessments take,
they expressed that assessments are
similar to conference planning and
include preparing materials, scheduling
participants, making travel
arrangements, arranging for audio
visual, and coordination of facilities.
NHTSA’s estimate only covered the
background material collection,
responding to questions and
participating in interviews during the
assessment week. In response to these
comments, NHTSA has increased the
estimated burden hours for occupant
protection and impaired driving
assessments to 88 hours. For traffic
records assessments, NHTSA continues
to estimate that the burden hours for a
traffic records assessment will be 123

E:\FR\FM\09MRN1.SGM

09MRN1

Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Notices

jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1

hours per respondent because these
assessments are conducted virtually and
involve submission of information
submitted via email as opposed to
through interviews.
Other Comments
While commenting on the 60-day
notice, GHSA took the opportunity to
include comments regarding other
aspects of the grant program, not
necessarily related to the information
collection request. Some of the
comments addressed aspects of the
grant program which cannot be changed
since they are part of the grant program
regulation (23 CFR 1300) or statutes.
NHTSA acknowledges these additional
topics raised that are unrelated to this
information collection request and will
respond to them separately through
other means.
Affected Public:
This collection impacts the fifty-seven
entities that are eligible to apply for
grants under the NHTSA Highway Grant
Program (the fifty States, the District of
Columbia, Puerto Rico, American
Samoa, Guam, the Commonwealth of
the Northern Mariana Islands, the U.S.
Virgin Islands, and the Bureau of Indian
Affairs on behalf of the Indian Country).
This collection also impacts the
subject matter experts and
administrative assistants who are
involved in assessments for the grant
program. These subject matter experts
are recruited by NHTSA based on
recommendations from NHTSA
Regional Offices and the State Highway
Safety Offices. All new occupant
protection and impaired driving
assessors complete an e-learning course,
Conducting Highway Safety Program
Assessments.The course is self-paced
and entirely on-line. Each impaired
driving and occupant protection
assessment team consists of five (5)
assessors and an administrative
assistant. For traffic records
assessments, NHTSA uses a contractor
to recruit and train the assessors for the
online traffic records assessment
conducted using NHTSA’s Traffic
Records Improvement Program
Reporting System (TRIPRS). All subject
matter experts are current or former
members of State Traffic Records
Coordinating Committees. There are
between 10 to 14 assessors for each
traffic records assessment.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
There are 57 potential State
respondents (the fifty States, the District
of Columbia, Puerto Rico, American
Samoa, Guam, the Commonwealth of
the Northern Mariana Islands, the U.S.
Virgin Islands, and the Bureau of Indian
Affairs on behalf of the Indian Country).

VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:44 Mar 08, 2022

Jkt 256001

NHTSA estimates there will be
approximately 260 assessors per year.
This estimate includes assessors and
administrative assistants. Each occupant
protection or impaired driving
assessment involves five (5) subject
matter experts and one (1)
administrative assistant. NHTSA
estimates that 13 occupant protection
and impaired driving assessments will
be completed each year, for a total of 78
respondents. Each traffic records
assessment involves approximately
thirteen (13) subject matter experts.
NHTSA estimates that 14 traffic records
assessments are completed each year,
for a total of 182 traffic records
assessors.
Frequency:
Applications for grant funding and
annual reporting are submitted once a
year and assessments are conducted
once every three or five years.
Number of Responses:
NHTSA estimates that it will receive
57 Section 402 grant applications, 56
Section 405 grant applications (except
for impaired driving countermeasures,
motorcyclist safety and nonmotorized
grants), and 52 Section 405 impaired
driving countermeasures, motorcyclist
safety and nonmotorized grant
applications. These estimates are based
on the number of eligible respondents
each year for each of the grants.
NHTSA estimates that there will be 9
State responses for assessments for
Section 405 occupation protection
grants, 14 State responses for
assessments for Section 405 traffic
safety information system improvement
grants, and 4 State responses for
assessments for Section 405 impaired
driving countermeasures grants
annually. Further, NHTSA estimates
that there will be 54 subject matter
expert responses for Section 405
occupation protection grants, 182
subject matter expert responses for
assessments for Section 405 traffic
safety information system improvement
grants, and 24 subject matter expert
responses for assessments for Section
405 impaired driving countermeasures
grants.
Estimated Total Annual Burden
Hours: 39,550.
The estimated burden hours for the
grant application and annual report part
of the collection of information are
based on all eligible respondents each
year for each of the grants:
• Section 402 grants: 57 (fifty States,
the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico,
the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam,
American Samoa, the Commonwealth of
the Northern Mariana Islands, and the
Bureau of Indian Affairs);

PO 00000

Frm 00113

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

13363

• Section 405 Grants (except
Impaired Driving Countermeasures,
Motorcyclist Safety and Nonmotorized
Grants) and Section 1906 Grant: 56 (fifty
States, the District of Columbia, Puerto
Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam,
American Samoa, and the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana
Islands); and
• Section 405, Impaired Driving
Countermeasures, Motorcyclist Safety
and Nonmotorized Grants: 52 (fifty
States, the District of Columbia, and
Puerto Rico).
Under the grant application and
annual report requirements for Sections
402 and 405, we estimate that it will
take each respondent approximately 490
hours to collect, review and submit the
required information to NHTSA (220
burden hours for 402 grant applications,
190 for 405 and 1906 grant applications,
and 80 hours for annual reports).8
Therefore, NHTSA estimates the total
annual burden for Section 402 grant
applications to be 12,540 hours (57
respondents × 220 hours), the total
annual burden for Section 405 and 1906
grant applications to be 10,640 hours
(56 respondents × 190 hours), and the
total annual burden for annual reports
to be 4,560 (57 respondents × 80 hours).
The estimated burden hours for the
assessment part of the collection of
information are based on the average
number of State assessments that are
carried out each year in each of the
covered grant areas: 9 NHTSA estimates
that there will be 9 assessments for
Section 405 occupant protection grants,
14 assessments for the Section 405
traffic safety information system
improvement grants, and 4 assessments
for the Section 405 impaired driving
grant each year. Based on this
information and the hours listed below,
the estimated annual burden hours for
all State respondents is 2,866 hours.
As the requirements for the program
assessments vary, the burden for each
type is calculated separately. For traffic
safety information system improvement
grants, we estimate that it takes 123
hours to respond to questions under the
assessment. For occupant protection
and impaired driving countermeasures
grants, we estimate that it takes 88 hours
to provide the required information and
8 Please note that the burden estimates for 405
and 1906 applications are based on every applicant
applying for a grant under all program areas.
Marginally, this may overestimate the total burden
as all applicants will not apply for a grant in each
program area each year.
9 Assessment average is based on the total number
of assessments conducted each year and divided by
the number of years since the inception of
assessment requirements for certain grants under
MAP–21, Public Law 112–141.

E:\FR\FM\09MRN1.SGM

09MRN1

13364

Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Notices

respond to questions under an
assessment.
Commenters did not question
NHTSA’s estimates for labor cost. For
the costs associated with respondents
preparing application materials NHTSA
used the estimated average wage for
‘‘Management Analysts,’’ Occupation
Code 13–1111. The Bureau of Labor
Statistics estimates that the average
hourly wage for management analysts in
State and local government is $31.95.10
The Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates

that wages for State and local
government workers represent 61.8% of
total compensation costs.11 Therefore,
NHTSA estimates the hourly labor costs
to be $51.70 and estimates that hourly
labor cost associated with preparing
materials to be $24,056 per respondent.
If all eligible States applied for and
received grants for all programs (and
including the annual number of
assessment responses required from
States), the total labor costs on all State
respondents would be $1,582,329.

These estimates are based on every
eligible respondent submitting the
required information for every available
grant. However, not all States apply for
and receive a grant each year under each
of these programs. In addition, under
Section 405 grants, some requirements
permit States to submit a single
application covering multiple years
allowing States to simply recertify in
subsequent years.

jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1

TABLE 1—ESTIMATED BURDEN HOURS AND LABOR COSTS FOR STATE RESPONDENTS
Number of
respondents

Burden hours
per
respondent

Hourly labor
costs

Total labor
costs

Total burden
hours

Information collection

Frequency

Section 402 Grant Application .............
405 and 1906 Grant Applications ........
Annual Report ......................................
405b Assessment ................................
405c Assessment ................................
405d Assessment ................................

Yearly .................
Yearly .................
Yearly .................
Every 3 years ....
Every 5 years ....
Every 3 years ....

57
56
57
9
14
4

220
190
80
88
123
88

$51.70
51.70
51.70
51.70
51.70
51.70

$648,318
550,088
235,752
40,946
89,027
18,198

12,540
10,640
4,560
792
1,722
352

Totals ............................................

............................

........................

........................

........................

$1,582,329

30,606

In addition to the burden hours for
State respondents, this information
collection also involves burden hours
for subject matter experts who assess the
States and burden hours for
administrative assistants. NHTSA
estimates the burden on subject matter
experts based on the number
assessments that will be performed each
year, the number of individuals
involved with each assessment, and the
estimated time for each assessor. As
stated above, NHTSA estimates that
there will be 9 assessments for Section
405 occupant protection grants, 14
assessments for the Section 405 traffic
safety information system improvement
grants, and 4 assessments for the
Section 405 impaired driving grant each
year. Each impaired driving and
occupant protection assessment team
consists of five (5) assessors and an
administrative assistant. For traffic
records assessments, there are between
10 to 14 assessors. For purposes of
estimate the total annual burden hours,
NHTSA estimates that there will be

approximately 13 assessors for each
traffic records assessment.
For occupant protection and impaired
driving assessments NHTSA estimates
that assessors spend approximately 80
hours of work on each assessment,
based on the following assumptions: 46
hours for the interviews and panel
discussions and 34 hours for pre- and
post- assessment activities, to include
reviewing: (1) Briefing book materials;
(2) resources on the State Highway
Safety Office’s website, and (3)
reviewing comments and/or suggestions
submitted from the State after their
review of the assessment final report.In
addition, an administrative assistant is
expected to spend approximately 46
hours preparing for the interviews and
panel discussions and 18 hours for preand post- assessment activities, to
include coordinating logistics, assisting
team members and editing the
document. Therefore, NHTSA estimates
the total annual burden for Section 405b
(occupant protection) assessment
subject matter experts to be 4,176 hours
((5 SME × 80 hours × 9 assessments) +
(1 Admin × 64 hours × 9 assessments))

and the total annual burden for Section
405d (impaired driving) assessment
subject matter experts to be 1,856 hours
((5 SME × 80 hours × 4 assessments) +
(1 Admin × 64 hours × 4 assessments)).
For traffic records assessments
(Section 405c), NHTSA estimates that
each subject matter expert will spend
approximately 16 hours on an
assessment. Therefore, NHTSA
estimates the total annual burden for
traffic records subject matter experts to
be 2,912 hours (13 SME × 16 hours × 14
assessments).
To calculate the cost associated with
the assessors time, NHTSA uses the
costs paid to the assessors. For occupant
protection and impaired driving
assessments, the State pays each subject
matter expert $2,700, which translates
to $33.75 per hour and pays each
administrative assistant $2,100, which
translates to $32.80 per hour. For traffic
records assessments NHTSA pays each
assessor $2,100 for their time, or
$131.25 per hour. Table 2 provides a
summary of the burden hours for subject
matter expert respondents.

10 See May 2019 National Industry-Specific
Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates,
NAICS 336100—Motor Vehicle Manufacturing,

available at https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/
naics4_999200.htm (accessed January 6, 2021).

11 See Table 1. Employer Costs for Employee
Compensation by ownership, available at https://
www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.t01.htm

VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:44 Mar 08, 2022

Jkt 256001

PO 00000

Frm 00114

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

E:\FR\FM\09MRN1.SGM

09MRN1

13365

Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Notices
TABLE 2—ESTIMATED BURDEN HOURS AND LABOR COSTS FOR SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT RESPONDENTS
Information collection
405b Assessment (every 3 years) .........
405c Assessment (every 5 years) .........
405d Assessment (every 3 years) .........
Total ................................................

Number of
respondents
per assessment

Number of
assessments
per year

Burden hours
per
respondent

5 SME ..................
1 Admin ...............
13 SME ................
5 SME ..................
1 Admin ...............

9
......................
14
4
......................

80
64
16
80
64

$33.75
32.80
131.25
33.75
32.80

$121,500
18,893
382,200
54,000
8,397

3,600
576
2,912
1,600
256

..............................

......................

......................

........................

584,990

8,944

Accordingly, NHTSA estimates the
total burden hours for this information
collection request is 39,550 hours and
the associated labor costs is estimated to
be $2,167,319.
Estimated Total Annual Burden Cost:
$422,500.
Apart from the costs incurred by
States for labor associated with the
burden hours, States are expected to
incur other costs in conjunction with
the assessments. There are other costs
involved related to conducting the event
such as subject matter expert stipend,
travel and per diem. These costs are
approximately $32,500 per occupant
protection and impaired driving
assessment. For the thirteen planned
assessments, the cost is estimated to be
$422,500.
Public Comments Invited: You are
asked to comment on any aspects of this
information collection, including (a)
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;
(b) 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;
(c) ways to enhance the quality, utility
and clarity of the information to be
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information
on respondents, including the use of
appropriate automated, electronic,
Application No.

mechanical, or other technological
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology, e.g., permitting
electronic submission of responses.
Authority: The Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as
amended; 49 CFR 1.49; and DOT Order
1351.29.
Issued on March 3, 2022.
Barbara F. Sauers,
Acting Associate Administrator for Regional
Operations and Program Delivery.
[FR Doc. 2022–04932 Filed 3–8–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration
Hazardous Materials: Notice of Actions
on Special Permits
Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration
(PHMSA), Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of actions on special
permit applications.
AGENCY:

In accordance with the
procedures governing the application
for, and the processing of, special
permits from the Department of
Transportation’s Hazardous Material
Regulations, notice is hereby given that
the Office of Hazardous Materials Safety
has received the application described
herein.

SUMMARY:

Applicant

Regulation(s) affected

Hourly labor
costs

Total labor
costs

Total burden
hours

Comments must be received on
or before April 8, 2022.
ADDRESSES: Record Center, Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration, U.S. Department of
Transportation Washington, DC 20590.
Comments should refer to the
application number and be submitted in
triplicate. If confirmation of receipt of
comments is desired, include a selfaddressed stamped postcard showing
the special permit number.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Donald Burger, Chief, Office of
Hazardous Materials Safety General
Approvals and Permits Branch, Pipeline
and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration, U.S. Department of
Transportation, East Building, PHH–13,
1200 New Jersey Avenue Southeast,
Washington, DC 20590–0001, (202) 366–
4535.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Copies of
the applications are available for
inspection in the Records Center, East
Building, PHH–13, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue Southeast, Washington DC.
This notice of receipt of applications
for special permit is published in
accordance with part 107 of the Federal
hazardous materials transportation law
(49 U.S.C. 5117(b); 49 CFR 1.53(b)).
DATES:

Issued in Washington, DC, on March 02,
2022.
Donald P. Burger,
Chief, General Approvals and Permits
Branch.
Nature of the special permits thereof

Special Permits Data—Granted
10511–M ............

jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1

11650–M ............
13112–M ............
14919–M ............
20907–M ............
20963–M ............

VerDate Sep<11>2014

Schlumberger Technology
Corp.
Autoliv Asp, Inc ......................

173.304a ................................

Cobham Mission Systems Orchard Park Inc.
Joyson Safety Systems Acquisition LLC.
Versum Materials Us, LLC .....

173.302a(a)(1) .......................

Lg Energy Solution Wroclaw
SP ZOO.

172.101(j) ...............................

17:44 Mar 08, 2022

Jkt 256001

PO 00000

173.301(a)(1), 173.302(a) ......

173.301(a)(1), 173.302a,
178.65(f)(2).
171.23(a)(1), 171.23(a)(3) .....

Frm 00115

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

To modify the special permit to authorize an additional
packaging configuration.
To modify the special permit to authorize cylinder weld
studs.
To modify the special permit to update the drawing revision
number of the packaging.
To modify the special permit to authorize a different pressure test and alternative safety control measures.
To modify the special permit to replace paragraph 7.b.(6)
with a 5-year service life restriction.
To modify the special permit to include additional cells in
the authorized battery modules.

E:\FR\FM\09MRN1.SGM

09MRN1