Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval: Driver Interactions With Advanced Driver Assistance Technologies, 51844-51848 [2020-18409]
Download as PDF
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
51844
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 163 / Friday, August 21, 2020 / Notices
10, Washington, DC 20590 (202) 366–
0354 or tia.swain@dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA), Public Law 104–13, Section 2,
109 Stat. 163 (1995) (codified as revised
at 44 U.S.C. 3501–3520), and its
implementing regulations, 5 CFR part
1320, require Federal agencies to issue
two notices seeking public comment on
information collection activities before
OMB may approve paperwork packages.
44 U.S.C. 3506, 3507; 5 CFR 1320.5,
1320.8(d)(1), 1320.12. On October 18,
2019, FTA published a 60-day notice
(84 FR 56012) in the Federal Register
soliciting comments on the ICR that the
agency was seeking OMB approval. FTA
received no comments after issuing this
60-day notice. Accordingly, DOT
announces that these information
collection activities have been reevaluated and certified under 5 CFR
1320.5(a) and forwarded to OMB for
review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR
1320.12(c).
Before OMB decides whether to
approve these proposed collections of
information, it must provide 30 days for
public comment. 44 U.S.C. 3507(b); 5
CFR 1320.12(d). Federal law requires
OMB to approve or disapprove
paperwork packages between 30 and 60
days after the 30-day notice is
published. 44 U.S.C. 3507 (b)–(c); 5 CFR
1320.12(d); see also 60 FR 44978, 44983,
Aug. 29, 1995. OMB believes that the
30-day notice informs the regulated
community to file relevant comments
and affords the agency adequate time to
digest public comments before it
renders a decision. 60 FR 44983, Aug.
29, 1995. Therefore, respondents should
submit their respective comments to
OMB within 30 days of publication to
best ensure having their full effect. 5
CFR 1320.12(c); see also 60 FR 44983,
Aug. 29, 1995.
The summaries below describe the
nature of the information collection
requirements (ICRs) and the expected
burden. The requirements are being
submitted for clearance by OMB as
required by the PRA.
Title: Metropolitan and Statewide and
Non-Metropolitan Transportation
Planning.
OMB Control Number: 2132–0529.
Type of Request: Renewal of a
previously approved information
collection.
Abstract: The FTA and Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA)
jointly carry out the federal mandate to
improve urban and rural transportation.
49 U.S.C. 5303 and 5304 and 23 U.S.C.
134 and 135 authorize the use of federal
funds to assist Metropolitan Planning
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:04 Aug 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
Organizations (MPOs), States, and local
public bodies in developing
transportation plans and programs to
serve the transportation needs of
urbanized areas over 50,000 in
population and other areas of States
outside of urbanized areas. The
information collection activities
involved in developing the Unified
Planning Work Program (UPWP), the
Metropolitan Transportation Plan, the
Long-Range Statewide Transportation
Plan, the Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP), and the Statewide
Transportation Improvement Program
(STIP) are necessary to identify and
evaluate the transportation issues and
needs in each urbanized area and
throughout every State. These products
of the transportation planning process
are essential elements in the reasonable
planning and programming of federally
funded transportation investments.
In addition to serving as a
management tool for MPOs, the UPWP
is used by both FTA and FHWA to
monitor the transportation planning
activities of MPOs. It also is needed to
establish national out year budgets and
regional program plans, develop policy
on using funds, monitor State and local
compliance with technical emphasis
areas, respond to Congressional
inquiries, prepare Congressional
testimony, and ensure efficiency in the
use and expenditure of Federal funds by
determining that planning proposals are
both reasonable and cost-effective.
49 U.S.C. 5303 and 23 U.S.C.134 (j)
require the development of TIPs for
urbanized areas; STIPs are mandated by
49 U.S.C. 5304 and 23 U.S.C. 135(g) for
an entire State. After approval by the
Governor and MPO, metropolitan TIPs
in attainment areas are to be
incorporated directly into the STIP. For
nonattainment areas, FTA/FHWA must
make a conformity finding on the TIPs
before including them in the STIP. The
complete STIP is then jointly reviewed
and approved or disapproved by FTA
and FHWA. These conformity findings
and approval actions constitute the
determination that States are complying
with the requirements of 23 U.S.C. 134
and 135 and 49 U.S.C. 5303 and 5304
as a condition of eligibility for federalaid funding. Without these documents,
approvals and findings, FTA and FHWA
cannot provide capital and/or operating
assistance.
Respondents: State Departments of
Transportation and MPOs.
Estimated Annual Respondents: 456
respondents.
Estimated Total Annual Burden:
4,198,379 hours.
PO 00000
Frm 00171
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Frequency: Annual.
Nadine Pembleton,
Director Office of Management Planning.
[FR Doc. 2020–18331 Filed 8–20–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2019–0037]
Agency Information Collection
Activities; Submission to the Office of
Management and Budget for Review
and Approval: Driver Interactions With
Advanced Driver Assistance
Technologies
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation.
ACTION: Notice and request for
comments on a request for approval of
a new information collection.
AGENCY:
In compliance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this
notice announces that the Information
Collection Request (ICR) abstracted
below has been forwarded to the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review and approval. A Federal Register
notice with a 60-day comment period
soliciting comments on the following
information collection was published on
May 21, 2019 (84 FR 23154). NHTSA
received 7 public comments. A
summary of the comments and the
changes NHTSA made in response to
those comments is provided below.
DATES: Written comments should be
submitted on or before September 21,
2020.
SUMMARY:
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 30day Review—Open for Public
Comment’’ or use the search function.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
additional information or access to
background documents, contact
Elizabeth Mazzae, Applied Crash
Avoidance Research Division, Vehicle
Research and Test Center, NHTSA,
10820 State Route 347—Bldg. 60, East
Liberty, Ohio 43319; Telephone (937)
666–4511; Facsimile: (937) 666–3590;
email address: elizabeth.mazzae@
dot.gov.
ADDRESSES:
E:\FR\FM\21AUN1.SGM
21AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 163 / Friday, August 21, 2020 / Notices
Before a
Federal agency can collect certain
information from the public, it must
receive approval from the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB). In
compliance with these requirements,
this notice announces that the following
information collection request has been
forwarded to OMB.
OMB Control Number: To be issued at
time of approval.
Title: Driver Interactions With
Advanced Driver Assistance
Technologies.
Form Numbers: NHTSA forms 1522,
1525, 1527.
Type of Request: New information
collection.
Type of Review Requested: Regular.
Length of Approval Requested: Three
years from the date of approval.
Abstract: NHTSA has proposed to
perform research involving the
collection of information from the
public as part of a multi-year effort to
learn about drivers’ use of and behavior
in interacting with certain advanced
driver assistance technologies (ADAS).
The research will involve on-road, seminaturalistic driving experimentation in
which participants who are members of
the general public will drive
government-owned instrumented
production vehicles equipped with
driver assistance technologies. The goal
is to measure drivers’ responses to
system alerts and their frequency of
system use, as well as observe their
behavior during system use. This
research will support NHTSA decisions
relating to safe implementation of
advanced driver assistance technologies.
The research will also investigate
whether drivers’ experience with one
brand’s ADAS impacts how they
interact when driving another vehicle
equipped with a different brand’s
systems. This scenario is one that would
be experienced with rental cars and
family vehicle sharing and will provide
important insights into how differences
in system operation and interface design
aspects may cause usability issues. The
observation of usability issues would
inform NHTSA about the benefits of
common system interface design aspects
(e.g., visual and auditory displays and
controls).
Participants will include drivers with
and without experience with the
particular ADAS features being studied.
Experienced drivers will be ones who
own one of the two vehicle models
equipped with the particular ADAS
feature(s) being studied and can be
verified to have a certain degree of
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:04 Aug 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
experience in using the feature(s).
Participants will be asked to drive a
specified route over public roadways
while using driver assistance
technologies. Participants’ actions to
engage the assistance features and
responses to unrequested
disengagements will be observed and
recorded.
Information will be collected during
the course of the research through
participant screening questions,
recording of video and engineering data,
and post-drive questionnaires.
Questions addressed to individuals will
serve to assess individuals’ suitability
for study participation, to obtain
feedback regarding participants’ use of
the ADAS technologies, and to gauge
individuals’ level of comfort with and
confidence in the technologies’
performance and safety. Since
qualitative feedback or self-report data
is not sufficiently robust for the purpose
of investigating driver performance/
interaction issues with advanced
vehicle control and safety technologies,
objective data will also be recorded
including driver eye glance behavior
and hand locations. Eye glance behavior
will reveal how drivers visually monitor
and respond to visual alert information.
Hand location data will provide
information regarding how well drivers
are able to engage the advanced driver
assistance functions efficiently (e.g.,
with one attempt or multiple attempts)
and how long it takes. We will observe
whether drivers engage in secondary
tasks (e.g., interacting with infotainment
functions) during feature engagement.
Description of the Need for the
Information and Proposed Use of the
Information:
The National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration’s (NHTSA) mission is to
save lives, prevent injuries, and reduce
healthcare and other economic costs
associated with motor vehicle crashes.
As driver assistance technologies
advance, they have the potential to
dramatically reduce the number of
motor vehicle crashes, injuries, and
associated economic costs. The safety
and effectiveness of the technologies
depends on drivers understanding the
capabilities, constraints, and visual and
auditory alerts provided. Drivers’
understanding of when assistance
features are available to use and when
they are not is important for safety. In
particular, drivers must understand and
respond quickly when a feature
indicates that it is disengaging and the
driver must retake full manual control
of driving. This work seeks to gather
PO 00000
Frm 00172
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
51845
information regarding how drivers who
are inexperienced compare to drivers
with experience using driver assistance
features including advanced cruise
control and either lane keeping
assistance or lane centering assistance.
The research will compare the two
groups’ use of these features in
interactions, response to disengagement
notifications, and proper use.
The collection of information will
consist of: (1) Question Set 1, Driving
Research Study Interest Response Form,
(2) Question Set 2, Screening Questions,
(3) passive observation of driving
behavior, and (4) Question Set 3, PostDrive Questionnaire.
Affected Public (Respondents):
Research participants will be licensed
drivers aged 25 years to 65 who drive
at least an average number of miles
annually (e.g., 11,000 miles), are in good
health, and do not require assistive
devices to safely operate a vehicle and
drive continuously for a period of 3
hours.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
The data collection will have two equalsized parts: One that will begin
immediately upon receipt of PRA
clearance and will involve use of two
2018–2019 model year U.S. production
vehicle models. The second part of the
data collection will begin after
completion of the first part and will
have the same approach, but will
involve different vehicle models.
Information for both parts of the data
collection will be collected in an
incremental fashion to permit the
determination of which individuals
have the necessary characteristics for
study participation. All interested
candidates will complete Question Set
1, Driving Research Study Interest
Response Form. A subset of individuals
meeting the criteria for Question Set 1
will be asked to complete Question Set
2, Screening Questions. From the
individuals found to meet the criteria
for both Questions sets 1 and 2, a subset
will be chosen with the goal of
achieving a sample providing a balance
of age and sex to be scheduled for study
participation.
A summary of the estimated numbers
of individuals that will complete the
noted question sets across both the first
and second data collection parts is
provided in the following table. Both
data collection parts will involve
approximately 500 respondents for
Question Set 1, 300 for Question Set 2,
and 150 for Question Set 3.
E:\FR\FM\21AUN1.SGM
21AUN1
51846
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 163 / Friday, August 21, 2020 / Notices
ESTIMATED NUMBER OF RESPONDENTS
Questions
Total N
Question Set 1, Driving Research Study Interest Response Form ....................................................................................................
Question Set 2, Screening Questions .................................................................................................................................................
Question Set 3, Post-Drive Questionnaire ..........................................................................................................................................
Estimated Time per Response: For
both parts of the data collection,
completion of Question Set 1, Driving
Research Study Interest Response Form
is estimated to take approximately 5
minutes and completion is estimated to
take approximately 7 minutes for
Question Set 2, Screening Questions.
Completion of Question Set 3, PostDrive Questionnaire is estimated to take
15 minutes per inexperienced
participant and 20 minutes per
experienced participant for both parts of
data collection.
The estimated annual time and cost
burdens across both the first and second
data collection parts are summarized in
the table below. For example, the
anticipated number of individuals
completing Question Set 1 for part 1 of
the data collection is half of 1000, or
500, and so on.
The number of respondents and time
to complete each question set are
1000
600
300
estimated as shown in the table. The
time per question set is calculated by
multiplying the number of respondents
by the time per respondent and then
converting from minutes to hours. The
hour value for each question set is
multiplied by the latest average hour
earning estimate from the Bureau of
Labor Statistics 1 to obtain an estimated
burden cost per question set.
ESTIMATED TIME PER RESPONSE AND TOTAL TIME
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Pay rate *
Total burden
hours
Question topic
1 ......................
Driving Research Study Interest Response Form.
Screening Questions ..............................
Post-Drive Questionnaire, Inexperienced
Post-Drive Questionnaire, Experienced
1000
5
$28.32
83.3
$ 2,359.91
600
150
150
7
15
20
28.32
28.32
28.32
70.0
37.5
50.0
1,982.40
1,062.00
1,416.00
Total Estimated Burden ................................................
........................
........................
........................
240.8
6,820.31
2 ......................
3 ......................
Participants
Time per
response
(minutes)
Question set
Frequency of Collection: The data
collections described will be performed
once to obtain the target number of 300
valid test participants.
On May 21, 2019, NHTSA published
a 60-day notice requesting public
comment on the proposed collection of
information.2 We received comments
from seven entities, including four
organizations and three individuals.
Organizations submitting comments
included AAA, The Center for Auto
Safety, Consumer Reports, and the
Motor & Equipment Manufacturers
Association (MEMA). All comments
were supportive of the research. No
comments addressed the questions to be
asked of participants. Some suggestions
for clarifying and expanding the
research are summarized below.
Some comments requested
clarification of participation criteria,
such as a more detailed definition of
what NHTSA would consider
‘‘experience’’ with using an ADAS. For
example, AAA recommended that in
relation to study participant
recruitment, NHTSA should collect
more information on candidate
participants’ personally-owned
vehicle(s), any ADAS features on their
vehicle(s), and the individuals’
experience with respect to ADAS
technologies. NHTSA wishes to clarify
that the participant recruitment criteria
listed in the prior published 60-day PRA
information collection notice was not a
complete accounting of all information
that will be considered in screening
candidate participants. The notice was
an announcement of a planned
information collection for the purposes
of obtaining PRA clearance and not a
full, detailed accounting and
substantiation of a research plan.
NHTSA has a strategy for characterizing
drivers’ experience with the specific
vehicle models and ADAS technologies
planned for involvement in the study.
For example, NHTSA will query state
vehicle registration data for a particular
VIN pattern to identify owners of
vehicle models equipped with the
technology of interest. In addition,
vehicle registration data will provide
information regarding how long an
individual has owned the vehicle. A
minimum annual driving mileage
1 * Cost per hour based on Bureau of Labor
Statistics Dec. 2019 Average Hourly Earnings data
for ‘‘Total Private,’’ $28.32 (Accessed Jan. 28, 2020
at https://www.bls.gov/news.release/
empsit.t19.htm).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:04 Aug 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00173
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Total cost
requirement will be used and
participants will be required to be a
primary driver of the vehicle model of
interest. Owners will also be questioned
about their use of the technology and
also be observed using the technology
during the experimental training step to
allow us to confirm that the individual
has an acceptable degree of system-use
knowledge desired for the study.
Some comments suggested
adjustments to study participation
criteria, such as lowering the minimum
annual mileage driven and including
younger and older drivers.
1. A suggestion to lower the minimum
annual driving mileage criterion of
14,000 miles was submitted by both
AAA and The Center for Auto Safety.
AAA commented that the stated mileage
criterion corresponded to drivers ‘‘who
are in the top quartile of all drivers
nationwide with respect to annual
driving mileage . . .’’. The study’s
annual mileage criterion is based on a
desire to obtain participants who drive
regularly. NHTSA agrees that annual
driving miles statistics show a declining
trend. In response to these comments
2 84
E:\FR\FM\21AUN1.SGM
FR 23154 (May 21, 2019).
21AUN1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 163 / Friday, August 21, 2020 / Notices
and further review of available data, the
minimum annual driving mileage
criterion will be lowered to 11,000
miles.
2. The Center for Auto Safety
commented that the stated participant
age range of 25–54 years does not
account for the other 49 percent of the
driver population who are under 25
years of age or over 54 and that ‘‘. . .
one of the fastest growing cohorts in the
United States are people aged 65 and
older.’’ For this research, due to limited
time and funding with which to conduct
the research, NHTSA chose a single age
group consisting of the ‘‘middle age’’
range of drivers, those aged 25 to 65,
that is considered to have generally
homogeneous driving behavior
characteristics. NHTSA will consider
including younger and older drivers in
subsequent research efforts.
Other comments suggested
broadening the study scope to include
additional vehicle models and a variety
of traffic scenarios and conditions.
1. Regarding the route over public
roads that participants will drive in the
research, AAA stated that the ‘‘course
should entail a variety of road
conditions including divided limited
access highways, two lane rural roads
and surface streets, as appropriate.
Varying traffic conditions should be
included as well.’’ Route selection for
the first part of this research is
constrained by the operational design
domain (ODD) of technologies and
vehicle models chosen for the study. As
such, the route to be used in the first
part of this work will necessarily consist
of multi-lane highways. For the second
part of this research, NHTSA will
consider available production ADASs
and their ODDs when selecting the route
to be used for testing.
2. Both AAA and MEMA
recommended that the study route
should permit participants to use the
technologies in different types of traffic
conditions and traffic volumes. NHTSA
will not control for traffic volumes
directly in this research, but will
constrain testing hours to daylight
periods and will record video data
documenting traffic conditions
experienced by participants during their
experimental drives for later
characterization as part of data analysis.
3. Consumer Reports expressed
concern that only two vehicle models
are planned for use in the first part of
this research. They noted that the
‘‘capabilities and limitations of these
systems can vary greatly among
manufacturers, and thus it would be
very difficult to generalize the results to
all vehicles if NHTSA’s research
includes only two vehicle models.’’
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:04 Aug 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
While testing additional models would
likely provide additional interesting
information, it is not feasible to test a
large number of vehicle models using
the planned research method and
ensure timely and relevant results. In
choosing vehicle models, we considered
feature availability, feature performance
(e.g., can lateral and longitudinal
control be engaged simultaneously?),
and sales. The two vehicles’ chosen
have different strategies for determining
when lateral and longitudinal control
may be engaged: One is speed based and
the other is map/location based. One of
the two vehicle models is also a fairly
frequently purchased model for which
the ADAS technologies of interest are
standard equipment.
For the second, subsequent part of
this research, NHTSA will consider
available production ADAS-equipped
vehicles and their ODDs and choose
ones that will best help us answer
important safety questions.
4. A comment from AAA stated that
‘‘NHTSA should ensure that the
methodology used for comparing
vehicles accounts for the system
variations, while tabulating the number
and reason for disengagements of the
system.’’ NHTSA wishes to clarify that
the focus of this research is not on
comparing systems from different
manufacturers, but rather to examine
how effectively drivers use and interact
with ADAS technologies involved in the
research. The research will also examine
the efficacy of the systems’ different
means of communication with the
driver in relation to status of the ADAS
feature(s). NHTSA has other ongoing
research efforts that focus on
characterizing technology performance
separate from the driver behavior and
technology use context.
5. MEMA recommended increasing
the survey accuracy by increasing
sample size. The total number of
participants planned for this on-road,
semi-naturalistic driving research is
300. For on-road, instrumented vehicle
research, this number represents quite a
large number of research participants
and would require substantial funding
and labor effort to complete the work.
NHTSA’s preliminary calculations show
that the planned sample size will
provide ample statistical power for the
study analyses planned.
6. AAA suggested that ‘‘Before
moving forward with experimental
design, NHTSA should provide the
public and industry an opportunity to
conduct a design review.’’ This step
could be critical in ensuring that
automakers who design and deploy
advanced driver assistance technologies
can provide appropriate feedback and
PO 00000
Frm 00174
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
51847
highlight important information to
NHTSA to optimize research results.’’
NHTSA generally welcomes exchanges
of information with industry partners.
In this instance, however, the approach
and experimental design for the first
part of this research is complete, as the
study’s magnitude in terms of number of
participants and time required for
participation (i.e., time burden) must be
estimated in order to request clearance
under the Paperwork Reduction Act.
NHTSA has taken pains to ensure that
the systems involved in the research
will be production ADAS-equipped
vehicles that are currently available for
sale to the American public. Also, the
vehicles will necessarily be driven on
roadways that maximize the
opportunity for use of the ADS features
being examined given the ODD of those
features. Therefore, we are confident
that the study results will provide
useful information to automakers.
Three additional comments from
individual members of the public
highlighted concerns regarding driving
automation. One commenter concerned
about the possibility of vehicles being
hacked and remotely controlled asserted
that in all vehicles with driving
automation capability, ‘‘there needs to
be the standard automotive equipment
and a manual override switch in place’’
so that ‘‘in case something happens it
can be changed back to ‘normal’ vehicle
functions instantly.’’ Another individual
suggested that ‘‘in addition to
instrumented vehicles for data
collection, the latest in virtual reality
technology be leveraged for such
efforts.’’ Lastly, a commenter stated his
belief that automation in vehicles needs
to be ‘‘all or nothing because as drivers
get acclimated to automation they will
lose their proficiency at driving a
vehicle. In my opinion all vehicles . . .
will have to operate on the same system,
with no human responsibilities . . .’’.
NHTSA appreciates the suggestions
regarding participation criteria and
additional experimental conditions to
consider; however, the scope of the
current work is limited by both program
timeline and allocated funding amount.
NHTSA will keep in mind the
suggestions as input for future research
programs.
Public Comments Invited
You are asked to comment on any
aspect of this information collection,
including (a) whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary
for the Department’s performance; (b)
the accuracy of the estimated burden; (c)
ways for the department to enhance the
quality, utility and clarity of the
information collection; and (d) ways
E:\FR\FM\21AUN1.SGM
21AUN1
51848
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 163 / Friday, August 21, 2020 / Notices
that the burden could be minimized
without reducing the quality of the
collected information.
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 in Washington, DC.
Cem Hatipoglu,
Associate Administrator, Office of Vehicle
Safety Research.
[FR Doc. 2020–18409 Filed 8–20–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Internal Revenue Service
Proposed Collection; Comment
Request for Form 8941
Internal Revenue Service (IRS),
Treasury.
ACTION: Notice and request for
comments.
AGENCY:
The Internal Revenue Service
(IRS), as part of its continuing effort to
reduce paperwork and respondent
burden, invites the general public and
other Federal agencies to take this
opportunity to comment on information
collections, as required by the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The
IRS is soliciting comments concerning
Credit for Small Employer Health
Insurance Premiums.
DATES: Written comments should be
received on or before October 20, 2020
to be assured of consideration.
ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments
to Kinna Brewington, Internal Revenue
Service, Room 6526, 1111 Constitution
Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20224.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Requests for additional information or
copies of the form and instructions
should be directed to Martha R. Brinson,
at (202)317–5753, or at Internal Revenue
Service, Room 6526, 1111 Constitution
Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20224, or
through the internet at
Martha.R.Brinson@irs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Title: Credit for Small Employer
Health Insurance Premiums.
OMB Number: 1545–2198.
Form Number: 8941.
Abstract: Section 1421 of the Patient
Protection and Affordable Care Act,
Public Law 111–148, allows qualified
small employers to elect, beginning in
2010, a tax credit for 50% of their
employee health care coverage
expenses. Form 8941, Credit for Small
Employer Health Insurance Premiums,
has been developed to help employers
compute the tax credit.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:04 Aug 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
Current Actions: There are no changes
being made to this form at this time.
Type of Review: Extension of a
currently approved collection.
Affected Public: Individuals or
households, Business or other for-profit
groups, Not-for-profit institutions,
Farms, Federal Government, State,
Local, or Tribal Governments.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
3,046,964.
Estimated Time Per Respondent: 11
hours 15 minutes.
Estimated Total Annual Burden
Hours: 34,278,346.
The following paragraph applies to all
of the collections of information covered
by this notice:
An agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information
unless the collection of information
displays a valid OMB control number.
Books or records relating to a
collection of information must be
retained as long as their contents may
become material in the administration
of any internal revenue law. Generally,
tax returns and tax return information
are confidential, as required by 26
U.S.C. 6103.
Request for Comments: Comments
submitted in response to this notice will
be summarized and/or included in the
request for OMB approval. Comments
will be of public record. Comments are
invited on: (a) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information has practical utility; (b) the
accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the
burden of the collection of information;
(c) ways to enhance the quality, utility,
and clarity of the information to be
collected; (d) ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information
on or other forms of information
technology; and (e) estimates of capital
or start-up costs and costs of operation,
maintenance, and purchase of services
to provide information.
Approved: August 14, 2020.
Martha R. Brinson,
Tax Analyst.
[FR Doc. 2020–18321 Filed 8–20–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Internal Revenue Service
Proposed Collection; Comment
Request for Form 211
Internal Revenue Service (IRS),
Treasury.
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00175
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Notice and request for
comments.
ACTION:
The Internal Revenue Service
(IRS), as part of its continuing effort to
reduce paperwork and respondent
burden, invites the general public and
other Federal agencies to take this
opportunity to comment on information
collections, as required by the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The
IRS is soliciting comments concerning
Application for Award for Original
Information.
SUMMARY:
Written comments should be
received on or before October 20, 2020
to be assured of consideration.
ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments
to Kinna Brewington, Internal Revenue
Service, Room 6526, 1111 Constitution
Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20224.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Requests for additional information or
copies of the form and instructions
should be directed to Martha R. Brinson,
at (202) 317–5753, or at Internal
Revenue Service, Room 6526, 1111
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington,
DC 20224, or through the internet at
Martha.R.Brinson@irs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Title: Application for Award for
Original Information.
OMB Number: 1545–0409.
Form Number: 211.
Abstract: Form 211 is the official
application form used by persons
requesting rewards for submitting
information concerning alleged
violations of the tax laws by other
persons. Such rewards are authorized by
Internal Revenue Code Section 7623.
The data is used to determine and pay
rewards to those persons who
voluntarily submit information.
Current Actions: There are no changes
being made to this form at this time.
Type of Review: Extension of a
currently approved collection.
Affected Public: Individuals or
households.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
20,000.
Estimated Time per Respondent: 45
mins.
Estimated Total Annual Burden
Hours: 15,000.
The following paragraph applies to all
of the collections of information covered
by this notice: An agency may not
conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of
information unless the collection of
information displays a valid OMB
control number. Books or records
relating to a collection of information
must be retained as long as their
contents may become material in the
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\21AUN1.SGM
21AUN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 163 (Friday, August 21, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51844-51848]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-18409]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2019-0037]
Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the
Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval: Driver
Interactions With Advanced Driver Assistance Technologies
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation.
ACTION: Notice and request for comments on a request for approval of a
new information collection.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this
notice announces that the Information Collection Request (ICR)
abstracted below has been forwarded to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) for review and approval. A Federal Register notice with a
60-day comment period soliciting comments on the following information
collection was published on May 21, 2019 (84 FR 23154). NHTSA received
7 public comments. A summary of the comments and the changes NHTSA made
in response to those comments is provided below.
DATES: Written comments should be submitted on or before September 21,
2020.
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 30-day Review--Open for Public
Comment'' or use the search function.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information or access
to background documents, contact Elizabeth Mazzae, Applied Crash
Avoidance Research Division, Vehicle Research and Test Center, NHTSA,
10820 State Route 347--Bldg. 60, East Liberty, Ohio 43319; Telephone
(937) 666-4511; Facsimile: (937) 666-3590; email address:
[email protected].
[[Page 51845]]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Before a Federal agency can collect certain
information from the public, it must receive approval from the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB). In compliance with these requirements,
this notice announces that the following information collection request
has been forwarded to OMB.
OMB Control Number: To be issued at time of approval.
Title: Driver Interactions With Advanced Driver Assistance
Technologies.
Form Numbers: NHTSA forms 1522, 1525, 1527.
Type of Request: New information collection.
Type of Review Requested: Regular.
Length of Approval Requested: Three years from the date of
approval.
Abstract: NHTSA has proposed to perform research involving the
collection of information from the public as part of a multi-year
effort to learn about drivers' use of and behavior in interacting with
certain advanced driver assistance technologies (ADAS). The research
will involve on-road, semi-naturalistic driving experimentation in
which participants who are members of the general public will drive
government-owned instrumented production vehicles equipped with driver
assistance technologies. The goal is to measure drivers' responses to
system alerts and their frequency of system use, as well as observe
their behavior during system use. This research will support NHTSA
decisions relating to safe implementation of advanced driver assistance
technologies.
The research will also investigate whether drivers' experience with
one brand's ADAS impacts how they interact when driving another vehicle
equipped with a different brand's systems. This scenario is one that
would be experienced with rental cars and family vehicle sharing and
will provide important insights into how differences in system
operation and interface design aspects may cause usability issues. The
observation of usability issues would inform NHTSA about the benefits
of common system interface design aspects (e.g., visual and auditory
displays and controls).
Participants will include drivers with and without experience with
the particular ADAS features being studied. Experienced drivers will be
ones who own one of the two vehicle models equipped with the particular
ADAS feature(s) being studied and can be verified to have a certain
degree of experience in using the feature(s). Participants will be
asked to drive a specified route over public roadways while using
driver assistance technologies. Participants' actions to engage the
assistance features and responses to unrequested disengagements will be
observed and recorded.
Information will be collected during the course of the research
through participant screening questions, recording of video and
engineering data, and post-drive questionnaires. Questions addressed to
individuals will serve to assess individuals' suitability for study
participation, to obtain feedback regarding participants' use of the
ADAS technologies, and to gauge individuals' level of comfort with and
confidence in the technologies' performance and safety. Since
qualitative feedback or self-report data is not sufficiently robust for
the purpose of investigating driver performance/interaction issues with
advanced vehicle control and safety technologies, objective data will
also be recorded including driver eye glance behavior and hand
locations. Eye glance behavior will reveal how drivers visually monitor
and respond to visual alert information. Hand location data will
provide information regarding how well drivers are able to engage the
advanced driver assistance functions efficiently (e.g., with one
attempt or multiple attempts) and how long it takes. We will observe
whether drivers engage in secondary tasks (e.g., interacting with
infotainment functions) during feature engagement.
Description of the Need for the Information and Proposed Use of the
Information:
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's (NHTSA)
mission is to save lives, prevent injuries, and reduce healthcare and
other economic costs associated with motor vehicle crashes. As driver
assistance technologies advance, they have the potential to
dramatically reduce the number of motor vehicle crashes, injuries, and
associated economic costs. The safety and effectiveness of the
technologies depends on drivers understanding the capabilities,
constraints, and visual and auditory alerts provided. Drivers'
understanding of when assistance features are available to use and when
they are not is important for safety. In particular, drivers must
understand and respond quickly when a feature indicates that it is
disengaging and the driver must retake full manual control of driving.
This work seeks to gather information regarding how drivers who are
inexperienced compare to drivers with experience using driver
assistance features including advanced cruise control and either lane
keeping assistance or lane centering assistance. The research will
compare the two groups' use of these features in interactions, response
to disengagement notifications, and proper use.
The collection of information will consist of: (1) Question Set 1,
Driving Research Study Interest Response Form, (2) Question Set 2,
Screening Questions, (3) passive observation of driving behavior, and
(4) Question Set 3, Post-Drive Questionnaire.
Affected Public (Respondents): Research participants will be
licensed drivers aged 25 years to 65 who drive at least an average
number of miles annually (e.g., 11,000 miles), are in good health, and
do not require assistive devices to safely operate a vehicle and drive
continuously for a period of 3 hours.
Estimated Number of Respondents: The data collection will have two
equal-sized parts: One that will begin immediately upon receipt of PRA
clearance and will involve use of two 2018-2019 model year U.S.
production vehicle models. The second part of the data collection will
begin after completion of the first part and will have the same
approach, but will involve different vehicle models.
Information for both parts of the data collection will be collected
in an incremental fashion to permit the determination of which
individuals have the necessary characteristics for study participation.
All interested candidates will complete Question Set 1, Driving
Research Study Interest Response Form. A subset of individuals meeting
the criteria for Question Set 1 will be asked to complete Question Set
2, Screening Questions. From the individuals found to meet the criteria
for both Questions sets 1 and 2, a subset will be chosen with the goal
of achieving a sample providing a balance of age and sex to be
scheduled for study participation.
A summary of the estimated numbers of individuals that will
complete the noted question sets across both the first and second data
collection parts is provided in the following table. Both data
collection parts will involve approximately 500 respondents for
Question Set 1, 300 for Question Set 2, and 150 for Question Set 3.
[[Page 51846]]
Estimated Number of Respondents
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Questions Total N
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question Set 1, Driving Research Study Interest Response 1000
Form...................................................
Question Set 2, Screening Questions..................... 600
Question Set 3, Post-Drive Questionnaire................ 300
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated Time per Response: For both parts of the data collection,
completion of Question Set 1, Driving Research Study Interest Response
Form is estimated to take approximately 5 minutes and completion is
estimated to take approximately 7 minutes for Question Set 2, Screening
Questions. Completion of Question Set 3, Post-Drive Questionnaire is
estimated to take 15 minutes per inexperienced participant and 20
minutes per experienced participant for both parts of data collection.
The estimated annual time and cost burdens across both the first
and second data collection parts are summarized in the table below. For
example, the anticipated number of individuals completing Question Set
1 for part 1 of the data collection is half of 1000, or 500, and so on.
The number of respondents and time to complete each question set
are estimated as shown in the table. The time per question set is
calculated by multiplying the number of respondents by the time per
respondent and then converting from minutes to hours. The hour value
for each question set is multiplied by the latest average hour earning
estimate from the Bureau of Labor Statistics \1\ to obtain an estimated
burden cost per question set.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ * Cost per hour based on Bureau of Labor Statistics Dec.
2019 Average Hourly Earnings data for ``Total Private,'' $28.32
(Accessed Jan. 28, 2020 at https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t19.htm).
Estimated Time per Response and Total Time
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time per
Question set Question topic Participants response Pay rate * Total burden Total cost
(minutes) hours
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.................................... Driving Research Study Interest 1000 5 $28.32 83.3 $ 2,359.91
Response Form.
2.................................... Screening Questions.............. 600 7 28.32 70.0 1,982.40
3.................................... Post-Drive Questionnaire, 150 15 28.32 37.5 1,062.00
Inexperienced.
Post-Drive Questionnaire, 150 20 28.32 50.0 1,416.00
Experienced.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Estimated Burden.............................................. .............. .............. .............. 240.8 6,820.31
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Frequency of Collection: The data collections described will be
performed once to obtain the target number of 300 valid test
participants.
On May 21, 2019, NHTSA published a 60-day notice requesting public
comment on the proposed collection of information.\2\ We received
comments from seven entities, including four organizations and three
individuals. Organizations submitting comments included AAA, The Center
for Auto Safety, Consumer Reports, and the Motor & Equipment
Manufacturers Association (MEMA). All comments were supportive of the
research. No comments addressed the questions to be asked of
participants. Some suggestions for clarifying and expanding the
research are summarized below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 84 FR 23154 (May 21, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some comments requested clarification of participation criteria,
such as a more detailed definition of what NHTSA would consider
``experience'' with using an ADAS. For example, AAA recommended that in
relation to study participant recruitment, NHTSA should collect more
information on candidate participants' personally-owned vehicle(s), any
ADAS features on their vehicle(s), and the individuals' experience with
respect to ADAS technologies. NHTSA wishes to clarify that the
participant recruitment criteria listed in the prior published 60-day
PRA information collection notice was not a complete accounting of all
information that will be considered in screening candidate
participants. The notice was an announcement of a planned information
collection for the purposes of obtaining PRA clearance and not a full,
detailed accounting and substantiation of a research plan. NHTSA has a
strategy for characterizing drivers' experience with the specific
vehicle models and ADAS technologies planned for involvement in the
study. For example, NHTSA will query state vehicle registration data
for a particular VIN pattern to identify owners of vehicle models
equipped with the technology of interest. In addition, vehicle
registration data will provide information regarding how long an
individual has owned the vehicle. A minimum annual driving mileage
requirement will be used and participants will be required to be a
primary driver of the vehicle model of interest. Owners will also be
questioned about their use of the technology and also be observed using
the technology during the experimental training step to allow us to
confirm that the individual has an acceptable degree of system-use
knowledge desired for the study.
Some comments suggested adjustments to study participation
criteria, such as lowering the minimum annual mileage driven and
including younger and older drivers.
1. A suggestion to lower the minimum annual driving mileage
criterion of 14,000 miles was submitted by both AAA and The Center for
Auto Safety. AAA commented that the stated mileage criterion
corresponded to drivers ``who are in the top quartile of all drivers
nationwide with respect to annual driving mileage . . .''. The study's
annual mileage criterion is based on a desire to obtain participants
who drive regularly. NHTSA agrees that annual driving miles statistics
show a declining trend. In response to these comments
[[Page 51847]]
and further review of available data, the minimum annual driving
mileage criterion will be lowered to 11,000 miles.
2. The Center for Auto Safety commented that the stated participant
age range of 25-54 years does not account for the other 49 percent of
the driver population who are under 25 years of age or over 54 and that
``. . . one of the fastest growing cohorts in the United States are
people aged 65 and older.'' For this research, due to limited time and
funding with which to conduct the research, NHTSA chose a single age
group consisting of the ``middle age'' range of drivers, those aged 25
to 65, that is considered to have generally homogeneous driving
behavior characteristics. NHTSA will consider including younger and
older drivers in subsequent research efforts.
Other comments suggested broadening the study scope to include
additional vehicle models and a variety of traffic scenarios and
conditions.
1. Regarding the route over public roads that participants will
drive in the research, AAA stated that the ``course should entail a
variety of road conditions including divided limited access highways,
two lane rural roads and surface streets, as appropriate. Varying
traffic conditions should be included as well.'' Route selection for
the first part of this research is constrained by the operational
design domain (ODD) of technologies and vehicle models chosen for the
study. As such, the route to be used in the first part of this work
will necessarily consist of multi-lane highways. For the second part of
this research, NHTSA will consider available production ADASs and their
ODDs when selecting the route to be used for testing.
2. Both AAA and MEMA recommended that the study route should permit
participants to use the technologies in different types of traffic
conditions and traffic volumes. NHTSA will not control for traffic
volumes directly in this research, but will constrain testing hours to
daylight periods and will record video data documenting traffic
conditions experienced by participants during their experimental drives
for later characterization as part of data analysis.
3. Consumer Reports expressed concern that only two vehicle models
are planned for use in the first part of this research. They noted that
the ``capabilities and limitations of these systems can vary greatly
among manufacturers, and thus it would be very difficult to generalize
the results to all vehicles if NHTSA's research includes only two
vehicle models.'' While testing additional models would likely provide
additional interesting information, it is not feasible to test a large
number of vehicle models using the planned research method and ensure
timely and relevant results. In choosing vehicle models, we considered
feature availability, feature performance (e.g., can lateral and
longitudinal control be engaged simultaneously?), and sales. The two
vehicles' chosen have different strategies for determining when lateral
and longitudinal control may be engaged: One is speed based and the
other is map/location based. One of the two vehicle models is also a
fairly frequently purchased model for which the ADAS technologies of
interest are standard equipment.
For the second, subsequent part of this research, NHTSA will
consider available production ADAS-equipped vehicles and their ODDs and
choose ones that will best help us answer important safety questions.
4. A comment from AAA stated that ``NHTSA should ensure that the
methodology used for comparing vehicles accounts for the system
variations, while tabulating the number and reason for disengagements
of the system.'' NHTSA wishes to clarify that the focus of this
research is not on comparing systems from different manufacturers, but
rather to examine how effectively drivers use and interact with ADAS
technologies involved in the research. The research will also examine
the efficacy of the systems' different means of communication with the
driver in relation to status of the ADAS feature(s). NHTSA has other
ongoing research efforts that focus on characterizing technology
performance separate from the driver behavior and technology use
context.
5. MEMA recommended increasing the survey accuracy by increasing
sample size. The total number of participants planned for this on-road,
semi-naturalistic driving research is 300. For on-road, instrumented
vehicle research, this number represents quite a large number of
research participants and would require substantial funding and labor
effort to complete the work. NHTSA's preliminary calculations show that
the planned sample size will provide ample statistical power for the
study analyses planned.
6. AAA suggested that ``Before moving forward with experimental
design, NHTSA should provide the public and industry an opportunity to
conduct a design review.'' This step could be critical in ensuring that
automakers who design and deploy advanced driver assistance
technologies can provide appropriate feedback and highlight important
information to NHTSA to optimize research results.'' NHTSA generally
welcomes exchanges of information with industry partners. In this
instance, however, the approach and experimental design for the first
part of this research is complete, as the study's magnitude in terms of
number of participants and time required for participation (i.e., time
burden) must be estimated in order to request clearance under the
Paperwork Reduction Act. NHTSA has taken pains to ensure that the
systems involved in the research will be production ADAS-equipped
vehicles that are currently available for sale to the American public.
Also, the vehicles will necessarily be driven on roadways that maximize
the opportunity for use of the ADS features being examined given the
ODD of those features. Therefore, we are confident that the study
results will provide useful information to automakers.
Three additional comments from individual members of the public
highlighted concerns regarding driving automation. One commenter
concerned about the possibility of vehicles being hacked and remotely
controlled asserted that in all vehicles with driving automation
capability, ``there needs to be the standard automotive equipment and a
manual override switch in place'' so that ``in case something happens
it can be changed back to `normal' vehicle functions instantly.''
Another individual suggested that ``in addition to instrumented
vehicles for data collection, the latest in virtual reality technology
be leveraged for such efforts.'' Lastly, a commenter stated his belief
that automation in vehicles needs to be ``all or nothing because as
drivers get acclimated to automation they will lose their proficiency
at driving a vehicle. In my opinion all vehicles . . . will have to
operate on the same system, with no human responsibilities . . .''.
NHTSA appreciates the suggestions regarding participation criteria
and additional experimental conditions to consider; however, the scope
of the current work is limited by both program timeline and allocated
funding amount. NHTSA will keep in mind the suggestions as input for
future research programs.
Public Comments Invited
You are asked to comment on any aspect of this information
collection, including (a) whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the Department's performance; (b) the
accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for the department to
enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information collection;
and (d) ways
[[Page 51848]]
that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of the
collected information.
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 in Washington, DC.
Cem Hatipoglu,
Associate Administrator, Office of Vehicle Safety Research.
[FR Doc. 2020-18409 Filed 8-20-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P