Update Means of Providing Notification; Improving Efficacy of Recalls |
|---|
|
Frank S. Borris II
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
January 25, 2016
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 15 (Monday, January 25, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 4007-4010]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-01291]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 577
[Docket No. NHTSA-2016-0001]
RIN 2127-AL66
Update Means of Providing Notification; Improving Efficacy of
Recalls
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21)
authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to amend, by regulation, the
means of notification required under the Safety Act, to be in a manner
other than, or in addition to, first-class mail. Furthermore, Section
24104 of the Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act)
expounds on the need to update the means of notification by requiring
the Agency to include notification by electronic means in addition to
first class mail notification, within 270 days of its enactment. MAP-21
also authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to improve the efficacy
of recalls by requiring manufacturers to send additional notifications
of defects or noncompliance if a second notification by the
manufacturer does not result in an adequate number of motor vehicles or
replacement equipment being returned for remedy.
NHTSA seeks public comment on the means, in addition to first class
mail, of providing notification to owners, purchasers, and dealers, by
a manufacturer of a motor vehicle or replacement equipment, that the
vehicle or equipment contains a defect related to motor vehicle safety
or does not comply with an applicable motor vehicle safety standard. As
a result of this ANPRM, the Agency anticipates receiving information
that will aid the Agency in developing a rule implementing the
notification requirements under MAP-21 and the FAST Act. The Agency
anticipates that comments and information received will aid in updating
the Agency's regulations.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 10, 2016.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
Internet: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the
online instructions for submitting comments.
Mail: Docket Management Facility, M-30, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building, Room W12-
140, Washington, DC 20590.
Hand Delivery or Courier: U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building, Room W12-
140, Washington, DC 20590 between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern Time,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Facsimile: (202) 493-2251.
Regardless of how you submit your comments, please mention the
docket number of this document.
You may also call the Docket at (202) 366-9322.
Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments and
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the Public
Participation heading in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this
notice. Note that all comments received will be posted without change
to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading under the Public
Participation heading in the Supplementary Information section below
for more information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For substantive issues: Jennifer
Timian, Office of Defects Investigation, National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, at (202) 366-4000. For legal issues: Justine
Casselle, Office of the Chief Counsel, National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, at (202) 366-2992.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Executive Summary
II. Notification Requirements Before and After MAP-21
A. Means of Notification
B. Additional Notifications
III. Public Participation
A. Means and Methods of Notification
B. General Owner Knowledge and Behavior/Availability of
Information to Owners
C. Privacy Act
IV. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
V. Submission of Comments
I. Executive Summary
The Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21)
authorizes the Agency to amend, through rulemaking, the means of
providing notification to owners, purchasers, and dealers, by a
manufacturer of a motor vehicle or replacement equipment, that the
vehicle or equipment contains a defect related to motor vehicle safety
or does not comply with an applicable federal motor vehicle safety
standard. MAP-21 also authorizes NHTSA to improve recall effectiveness
by requiring manufacturers to send additional notifications of defects
or noncompliance if a second notification by the manufacturer does not
result in an adequate number of motor vehicles or replacement equipment
being returned for remedy. Finally, MAP-21 authorizes NHTSA to permit
``public notice'' in addition to individualized notification. More
recently, Section 24104 of the Fixing America's Surface Transportation
Act (FAST Act) requires the Agency to amend the means of notification
to owners by including electronic notification in addition to first
class mail notification.
[[Page 4008]]
Much has changed in the ways and means by which manufacturers
communicate with their customers and influence behavior since the
1970's when U.S. law first required manufacturers to notify owners in
the event of a safety recall. Hard copy mail has become far less
prominent in the wake of virtually instantaneous electronic message
such as email and text messaging, in addition to heavy use of social
media. First class mail does not inform as to whether an owner actually
received the mail, let alone whether they read it and understood it,
whereas electronic messaging technologies are capable of confirming
whether the message at least was delivered to the address given. This
ANPRM seeks comments and supporting information on the specific means
and methods of notification that manufacturers use, and those that
manufacturers consider are most effective, to reach their owners and
purchasers as well as motivate them to have safety recalls completed.
We seek to learn and obtain opinion on what methods should be required
of manufacturers, as well as what methods are viable as alternatives in
the event a recall campaign does not meet expectations and/or the
Agency believes a public notification as contemplated by the statute is
appropriate. This is all in an effort to leverage the new authorities
NHTSA has been given to most efficiently and effectively improve safety
recall completion rates. NHTSA will use the comments and supporting
information submitted in response to this ANPRM to inform its
development of a regulatory proposal that would allow notification of
safety related recalls to be issued by means other than, or in addition
to, first-class mail.
II. Notification Requirements Before and After MAP-21
A. Means of Notification
49 U.S.C. 30118(c) requires motor vehicle manufacturers or
manufacturers of replacement equipment to ``notify . . . the owners,
purchasers, and dealers of vehicle or equipment as provided in section
30119(d) of this section, if the manufacturer:
1. Learns the vehicle or equipment contains a defect and decides in
good faith that the defect is related to motor vehicle safety; or
2. Decides in good faith that the vehicle or equipment does not
comply with an applicable motor vehicle safety standard prescribed
under this chapter.
The manner by which this required notice would be given to owners or
purchasers of vehicles or equipment is governed by 49 U.S.C. 30119(d).
Prior to MAP-21, and for vehicle recalls, section 30119(d) required
notice is to be sent via first-class mail to the registered owner, or
if the registered owner could not be identified, to the most recent
purchaser known to the manufacturer. 49 U.S.C. 30119(d)(1)(A)-(B). For
recalls of replacement equipment, the statute required notification to
the most recent purchaser. Id.
Section 31310 of MAP-21 amended the notice provisions in 49 U.S.C.
30119(d) to allow the Secretary of Transportation, and by delegation
NHTSA's Administrator, the flexibility to determine the manner by which
notifications about safety recalls under 49 U.S.C. 30118 must be sent.
The statute requires notification to be sent to each registered owner
whose name and address is reasonably ascertainable through State
records or other available sources, or the most recent purchaser known
to the manufacturer. 49 U.S.C. 30119(d)(1)(A)-(B). Manufacturers are
also required to notify dealers under the statute. 49 U.S.C.
30119(d)(4). The amended statutory language authorizes the Agency to
engage in a rulemaking to permit notification of vehicle defects and
noncompliance by means other than first-class mail, such as electronic
notification. Recently, the FAST Act expounds on this authority by
expressly requiring the Agency to amend, by rulemaking, the means of
notification to include electronic notification.
B. Additional Notifications
Not only did Section 31310 address the means of providing
notification, both on an individualized basis and on a more broad-based
level, but it also addressed improving the efficacy of recalls through
additional notifications. Previously, 49 U.S.C. 30119(e) authorized the
Secretary to order a second notification if the Secretary determined
that the first notification failed to result in an adequate number of
motor vehicles or items of replacement equipment being returned for
remedy. The statute was silent, however, as to whether additional
notifications beyond a second notification could be required. Section
31310 resolves this question by amending 49 U.S.C. 30119(e), which now,
under 49 U.S.C. 30119(e)(2)(A)(i), authorizes the Secretary to order
additional notifications if the Secretary determines that a second
notification also failed to result in an adequate number of motor
vehicles or items of replacement equipment being returned for remedy.
Like the notifications addressed above, the means of additional
notifications is to be in a ``manner prescribed by the Secretary, by
regulation.'' 49 U.S.C. 30119(e)(2)(A)(i). This language anticipates
the Agency will engage in rulemaking to contemplate and permit, if not
order where warranted, notification of motor vehicle and equipment
defects and failures to comply by means other than first-class mail.
III. Public Participation
NHTSA invites comments and information on how the agency can best
leverage the new flexibilities it has been given under MAP-21 and the
FAST Act to update the required means manufacturers use, whether as a
first notification or as a follow-up notification, to successfully
notify their owners and purchasers and urge them toward seeking the
free remedies they are offered. As a general matter, the Agency
requests that commenters provide as much research, evidence, or data as
possible to support their comments, including cost-benefit information,
as that information will be of great assistance to the Agency as it
moves forward in the development of a proposed rule. The questions
below are intended to focus, but not limit, the information and
opinions commenters offer. Commenters are encouraged to offer any
suggestions or tactics that may not have been expressly mentioned in
this notice.
A. Means and Methods of Notification
(1) How effective has traditional first class mail been at reaching
owners? What is the estimated delivery rate for vehicle recalls where
registered owner information from state agencies and the U.S.
territories are available? What is the estimated delivery rate for
equipment recalls where these information sources are not available?
How many owners are equipment manufacturers able to notify using
traditional first class mail?
(2) Other than by first class mail, in what ways can and do
manufacturers notify owners about safety recalls? How do, or should,
those means and methods change dependent upon the product being sold or
how it was sold (e.g., vehicles as opposed to replacement equipment, or
online sales as opposed to brick and mortar retail shops)? What are the
respective rates of delivery success for these methods? What
information or technology is available and used to calculate these
rates of delivery?
(3) What are the corresponding rates of remedy completion for these
methods discussed in your response to paragraph (2) above?
[[Page 4009]]
(4) What sales and marketing methods and techniques could be
employed for safety recall communications? Which have shown the most
success in terms of owners understanding and owner recall completion,
which have shown the least, and why? What information or technology is
available and used to calculate these findings and how do manufacturers
determine if these methods motivated the recall completion as opposed
to the recall completion being motivated by other tools such as first
class mailings?
(5) If manufacturers communicate with owners through email, text
messaging, smart phone applications, or other electronic means, which
method of communication do manufacturers find most effective at
reaching owners? Which method of communication do owners prefer? Are
there best practices as to when and how these communications are
applied and when they are not? Are there certain demographics that seem
to respond less or more to certain types of electronic communications?
(6) Are manufacturers using social media to inform owners of safety
recalls and influence owners' behavior to have recalls work completed?
What media is being used and which have been the most or least
effective in terms of ``click-throughs'' or other methods for tracking
owner attention? Are there certain demographics that seem to respond
less or more to social media generally and/or specific types of social
media? Are there best practices as to when and how these communications
are applied and when they are not?
(7) Are there any legal or other limitations of which the Agency
should be aware in contemplating any of the alternatives noted above or
mentioned in your comments?
(8) Do manufacturers currently have access to owners' email
addresses? Excluding collecting emails at point of sale, from where do
manufacturers collect this information and how do they determine its
``freshness'' or accuracy? Should owners be required to provide an
email address as part of a purchase or service transaction? Should the
answer depend on how and where the product was purchased, the purchase
price of the product, or some other factor? Why or why not?
(9) What contingencies do manufacturers have in place to avoid spam
filters or to indicate that an email relates to a safety recall
explicitly? What assurances are, or could be, put in place to confirm
that an email was (a) received and (b) opened?
(10) The purpose of 49 CFR part 577 is ``to ensure that
notifications of defects or noncompliances adequately inform and
effectively motivate owners of potentially defective or noncomplying
motor vehicles or items of replacement equipment to have such vehicles
or equipment inspected and, where necessary, remedied as quickly as
possible.'' Does notification by means other than first-class mail and
email carry out this purpose? What about text alerts, social media
campaigns, and other less traditional methods?
B. General Owner Knowledge and Behavior/Availability of Information to
Owners
(1) Do owners read and understand the information they are
currently receiving from required safety recall notices delivered via
first class mail? What data or research supports your response?
(2) Is there data identifying why owners do not react to safety
recall notices they receive from their manufacturers? What does that
data suggest would increase owner behavior toward recall completion? Is
there data indicating whether an increase in owners recall completion
is more likely to occur in the presence of cash incentives, service
offers, or other means? Is there data indicating otherwise?
(3) What recall information do owners want and how do they want it
expressed? Are there particular words or phrases? Are their particular
formats or graphics that align more with recall completion? If any
focus group studies have been conducted by manufacturers or other
organizations regarding owners' needs in this area, should the Agency
use them to aid in assessing how to meet those needs?
(4) Should the Agency engage in its own behavior study including,
but not limited to, surveys, polls, and focus groups? If so, what
questions should be asked? What strategies used? How large of a survey
or poll should be conducted?
C. Privacy Act
Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).
IV. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 and DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures
This rulemaking document was not reviewed under Executive Order
12866 or Executive Order 13563. NHTSA has considered the impact of this
ANPRM under the Department of Transportation's regulatory policies and
procedures. This ANPRM seeks comments and supporting information on how
the Agency can best update the means of notifying owners, purchasers,
and dealers of recalls in an effort to improve vehicle safety recall
completion rates. Because this rulemaking only seeks comments and
information to aid in the Agency's development of a proposed rule, the
impact of this ANPRM is limited. Therefore, this rulemaking has been
determined to be not ``significant'' under the Department of
Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures and the policies of
the Office of Management and Budget.
Paperwork Reduction Act
As this Notice is an ANPRM, we are not proposing to adopt any new
information collection or record keeping requirements. If, after
considering the public comments received in response to this notice
NHTSA decides to issue a notice of proposed rulemaking that includes
information collection or record keeping requirements, that notice will
discuss any new paperwork burden associated with those proposed
requirements.
Regulatory Identifier Number (RIN)
The Department of Transportation assigns a regulation identifier
number (RIN) to each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of
Federal Regulations. The Regulatory Information Service Center
publishes the Unified Agenda in April and October of each year. You may
use the RIN contained in the heading at the beginning of this document
to find this action in the Unified Agenda.
V. Submission of Comments
How can I influence NHTSA's thinking on this rulemaking?
Your comments will help us improve this proposed rulemaking. We
invite you to provide different views on options we discuss, new
approaches we have not considered, new data, descriptions of how this
ANPRM may affect you, or other relevant information. We welcome your
views on all aspects of this ANPRM, but request comments on specific
issues throughout this document. Your comments will be most
[[Page 4010]]
effective if you follow the suggestions below:
Explain your views and reasoning as clearly as possible.
Provide solid evidence and data to support your views.
If you estimate potential costs, explain how you arrived
at that estimate.
Tell us which parts of the ANPRM you support, as well as
those with which you disagree.
Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns.
Offer specific alternatives.
Refer your comments to the specific sections of the ANPRM.
Your comments must be written in English. To ensure that your
comments are correctly filed in the docket, please include the docket
number of this document in your comments.
Your comments must not be more than 15 pages long. 49 CFR 553.21.
We established this limit to encourage you to write your primary
comments in a concise fashion. However, you may attach necessary
additional documents to your comments. There is no limit on the length
of the attachments.
Please submit your comments to the docket electronically by logging
onto http://www.regulations.gov or by the means given in the ADDRESSES
section at the beginning of this document. Please note that pursuant to
the Data Quality Act, in order for substantive data to be relied upon
and used by the agency, it must meet the information quality standards
set forth in the OMB and DOT Data Quality Act guidelines. Accordingly,
we encourage you to consult the guidelines in preparing your comments.
OMB's guidelines may be accessed at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/fedreg/reproducible.html.
How do I submit confidential business information?
If you wish to submit any information under a claim of
confidentiality, you should submit three copies of your complete
submission, including the information you claim to be confidential
business information, to the Chief Counsel, NHTSA, at the address given
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. In addition, you should
submit a copy from which you have deleted the claimed confidential
business information to the docket. When you send a comment containing
information claimed to be confidential business information, you should
include a cover letter setting forth the information specified in our
confidential business information regulations. 49 CFR part 512.
Will the agency consider late comments?
We will consider all comments that the docket receives before the
close of business on the comment closing date indicated in the DATES
section. To the extent possible, we will also consider comments that
the docket receives after that date. If the docket receives a comment
too late for us to consider it in developing the next step in this
rulemaking, we will consider that comment as an informal suggestion for
future rulemaking action.
How can I read the comments submitted by other people?
You may read the comments received by the docket at the address
given in the ADDRESSES section. You may also see the comments on the
Internet (http://regulations.gov). Please note that even after the
comment closing date, we will continue to file relevant information in
the docket as it becomes available. Further, some people may submit
late comments. Accordingly, we recommend that you periodically check
the docket for new material. Anyone is able to search the electronic
form of all comments name of the individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act
Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR
19476 at 19477-78).
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30102, 30103, 30116-30121, 30166;
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.95 and 49 CFR 501.8.
Issued in Washington, DC, on January 14, 2016 under authority
delegated pursuant to 49 CFR 1.95.
Frank S. Borris II,
Acting Associate Administrator for Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2016-01291 Filed 1-22-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P