Reports, Forms, and Record Keeping Requirements |
|---|
|
Jeffrey Giuseppe
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
2 October 2017
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 189 (Monday, October 2, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45941-45946]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-21053]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[U.S. DOT Docket Number NHTSA-2016-0065]
Reports, Forms, and Record Keeping Requirements
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), U.S.
Department of Transportation.
ACTION: Request for comment on the renewal of collection of
information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Before a Federal agency can collect certain information from
the public, it must receive approval from the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB). Under procedures established by the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, before seeking OMB approval, Federal agencies must solicit
public comment on proposed collections of information, including
extensions and reinstatement of previously approved collections.
This document describes a collection of information for which NHTSA
intends to seek OMB approval.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 1, 2017.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments using any of the following methods.
All comments must have the applicable DOT docket number (i.e., NHTSA-
2016-0065) noted conspicuously on them.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
Mail: Docket Management Facility, M-30: U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
Hand Delivery or Courier: 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001, between
9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, Monday through
[[Page 45942]]
Friday, except Federal holidays. Telephone: 1-800-647-5527.
Fax: 202-493-2251.
Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and
docket number for this proposed collection of information. Note that
all comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.
Please see the Privacy Act heading below.
Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78) or you may visit http://DocketInfo.dot.gov.
Docket: For access to comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the street address listed above. Follow the
online instructions for accessing the dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, or for
background documents, contact Stephen Hench, Office of Chief Counsel
(NCC-0100), Room W41-229, NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590. Telephone: 202-366-2992.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
before an agency submits a proposed collection of information to OMB
for approval, it must first publish a document in the Federal Register
providing a 60-day comment period and otherwise consult with members of
the public and affected agencies concerning each proposed collection of
information. The OMB has promulgated regulations describing what must
be included in such a document. Under OMB's regulation, see 5 CFR
1320.8(d), an agency must ask for public comment on the following:
(i) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for
the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including
whether the information will have practical utility;
(ii) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
(iii) how to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and
(iv) how to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses.
In compliance with these requirements, NHTSA asks for public
comments on the following collection of information:
Title: Defect and Noncompliance Reporting and Notification.
Type of Request: Renewal of a currently approved information
collection.
OMB Control Number: 2127-0004.
Affected Public: Businesses or individuals.
Abstract: This notice requests comment on NHTSA's proposed renewal
to approved collection of information OMB No. 2127-0004. This
collection covers the information collection requirements found within
various statutory sections in the Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966
(Act), 49 U.S.C. 30101, et seq., that address and require manufacturer
notifications to NHTSA of safety-related defects and failures to comply
with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) in motor vehicles
and motor vehicle equipment, as well as the provision of particular
information related to the ensuing owner and dealers notifications and
free remedy campaigns that follow those notifications. The sections of
the Act imposing these requirements include 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30119,
30120, and 30166. Many of these requirements are implemented through,
and addressed with more specificity in, 49 CFR part 573, Defect and
Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports (Part 573) and 49 CFR 577,
Defect and Noncompliance Notification (Part 577).
Pursuant to the Act, motor vehicle and motor vehicle equipment
manufacturers are obligated to notify, and then provide various
information and documents to, NHTSA in the event a safety defect or
noncompliance with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) is
identified in products they manufactured. See 49 U.S.C. 30118(b) and 49
CFR 573.6. Manufacturers are further required to notify owners,
purchasers, dealers, and distributors about the safety defect or
noncompliance. See 49 U.S.C. 30118(b), 30120(a); 49 CFR 577.7, 577.13.
Manufacturers are required to provide to NHTSA copies of communications
pertaining to recall campaigns that they issue to owners, purchasers,
dealers, and distributors. See 49 U.S.C. 30166(f); 49 CFR 573.6(c)(10).
Manufacturers are also required to file with NHTSA a plan
explaining how they intend to reimburse owners and purchasers who paid
to have their products remedied before being notified of the safety
defect or noncompliance, and explain that plan in the notifications
they issue to owners and purchasers about the safety defect or
noncompliance. See 49 U.S.C. 30120(d) and 49 CFR 573.13. Manufacturers
are further required to keep lists of the respective owners,
purchasers, dealers, distributors, lessors, and lessees of the products
determined to be defective or noncompliant and involved in a recall
campaign, and are required to provide NHTSA with a minimum of six
quarterly reports reporting on the progress of their recall campaigns.
See 49 CFR 573.8 and 573.7, respectively.
In addition, in an enforcement action, certain manufacturers may be
required by administrative order to conduct supplemental recall
communications utilizing non-traditional means (e.g., text messaging,
social media) crucial to achieving completion of a unique, large-scale
recall. Presently, NHTSA is overseeing recalls of unprecedented
complexity involving Takata air bag inflators, where it has required
such supplemental owner communications.\1\ NHTSA specifically seeks
comment on its estimates of the supplemental recall communications
associated with the Takata recalls.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See ``Notice of Coordinated Remedy Program Proceeding for
the Replacement of Certain Takata Air Bag Inflator,'' available at
https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=NHTSA-2015-0055.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Act and Part 573 also contain numerous information collection
requirements specific to tire recall and remedy campaigns. These
requirements relate to the proper disposal of recalled tires, including
a requirement that the manufacturer conducting the tire recall submit a
plan and provide specific instructions to certain persons (such as
dealers and distributors) addressing that disposal, and a requirement
that those persons report back to the manufacturer certain deviations
from the plan. See 49 U.S.C. 30120(d) and 49 CFR 573.6(c)(9). The
regulations also require that manufacturers report to NHTSA intentional
and knowing sales or leases of defective or noncompliant tires.
49 U.S.C. 30166(n) and its implementing regulation found at 49 CFR
573.10 mandate that anyone who knowingly and willfully sells or leases
for use on a motor vehicle a defective tire or a tire that is not
compliant with FMVSS, and with actual knowledge that the tire
manufacturer has notified its dealers of the defect or noncompliance as
required under the Act, is required to report that sale or lease to
NHTSA no
[[Page 45943]]
more than five working days after the person to whom the tire was sold
or leased takes possession of it.
Estimated Burden: The existing information collection associated
with 49 CFR part 573 and portions of 49 CFR part 577 currently has an
estimated annual burden of 36,070 hours associated with an estimated
275 respondents per year.\2\ Our prior estimates of the burden hours
and cost associated with the requirements currently covered by this
information collection require adjustment as follows.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See 81 FR 70269 (October 11, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on current information, we estimate 274 distinct
manufacturers filing an average of 963 Part 573 Safety Recall Reports
each year. This is a change from our previous estimate of 854 Part 573
Safety Recall Reports filed by 275 manufacturers each year. In
addition, with reference to the metric associated with NHTSA's VIN
Look-up Tool regulation, see 49 CFR 573.15, we continue to estimate it
takes the 17 major passenger-vehicle manufacturers (that produce more
than 25,000 vehicles annually) more burden hours to complete these
Reports to NHTSA. See 81 FR 70270 (October 11, 2016). Between 2014 and
2016, the major passenger-vehicle manufacturers conducted an average of
299 recalls annually.
We continue to estimate that maintenance of the required owner,
purchaser, dealer, and distributors lists requires 8 hours a year per
manufacturer. We also continue estimate it takes a major passenger-
vehicle manufacturer 20 hours to complete each notification report to
NHTSA, and it takes all other manufacturers 4 hours. Accordingly, we
estimate the annual burden hours related to the reporting to NHTSA of a
safety defect or noncompliance for the 17 major passenger vehicle-
manufacturers to be 5,980 hours annually (299 notices x 20 hours/
report), and that all other manufacturers require a total of 2,656
hours annually (664 notices x 4 hours/report) to file their notices.
Accordingly, the estimated annual burden hours related to the reporting
to NHTSA of a safety defect or noncompliance is 10,828 hours (5,980
hours + 2,656 hours) + (274 MFRs x 8 hours to maintain purchaser
lists).\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ For more information about how we derived these and certain
other estimates please see 81 FR 70269 (October 11, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We continue to estimate that an additional 40 hours will be needed
to account for major passenger-vehicle manufacturers adding details to
Part 573 Safety Recall Reports relating to the intended schedule for
notifying its dealers and distributors, and tailoring its notifications
to dealers and distributors in accordance with the requirements of 49
CFR 577.13. An additional 2 hours will be needed to account for this
obligation in other manufacturers' Safety Recall Reports. This burden
is estimated at 13,288 hours annually (664 notices x 2 hours/
notification) + (299 notices x 40 hours/notification).
49 U.S.C. 30166(f) requires manufacturers to provide to the Agency
copies of all communications regarding defects and noncompliances sent
to owners, purchasers, and dealerships. Manufacturers must index these
communications by the year, make, and model of the vehicle as well as
provide a concise summary of the subject of the communication. We
continue to estimate this burden requires 30 minutes for each vehicle
recall. This totals an estimated 482 hours annually (963 recalls x .5
hours).
In the event a manufacturer supplied the defective or noncompliant
product to independent dealers through independent distributors, that
manufacturer is required to include in its notifications to those
distributors an instruction that the distributors are to then provide
copies of the manufacturer's notification of the defect or
noncompliance to all known distributors or retail outlets further down
the distribution chain within five working days. See 49 CFR
577.7(c)(2)(iv). As a practical matter, this requirement would only
apply to equipment manufacturers since vehicle manufacturers generally
sell and lease vehicles through a dealer network, and not through
independent distributors. We believe our previous estimate of 95
equipment recalls per year needs to be adjusted to 87 equipment recalls
per year to better reflect recent data. Although distributors are not
required to follow that instruction, we expect that they will, and have
estimated the burden associated with these notifications (identifying
retail outlets, making copies of the manufacturer's notice, and
mailing) to be 5 hours per recall campaign. Assuming an average of 3
distributors per equipment item, (which is a liberal estimate given
that many equipment manufacturers do not use independent distributors)
the total number of burden hours associated with this third-party
notification burden is approximately 1,305 hours per year (87 recalls x
3 distributors x 5 hours).
As for the burden linked with a manufacturer's preparation of and
notification concerning its reimbursement for pre-notification
remedies, we continue to estimate that the preparation of a
reimbursement plan takes approximately 4 hours annually, an additional
.5 hours per year is spent tailoring the plan to particular defect and
noncompliance notifications to NHTSA and adding tailored language about
the plan to a particular safety recall's owner notification letters,
and an additional 12 hours annually is spent disseminating plan
information, for a total 4,866 annual burden hours ((274 MFRs x 4 hours
to prepare plan) + (963 recalls x .5 hours tailoring plan for each
recall) + (274 MFRs x 12 hours to disseminate plan information)). For
more information about how we calculated these estimates please see the
Federal Register Notices 81 FR 70269 (October 11, 2016).
The Safety Act and 49 CFR part 573 also contain numerous
information collection requirements specific to tire recall and remedy
campaigns, as well as a statutory and regulatory reporting requirement
that anyone who knowingly and intentionally sells or leases a defective
or noncompliant tire notify NHTSA of that activity.
Manufacturers are required to include specific information related
to tire disposal in the notifications they provide NHTSA concerning
identification of a safety defect or noncompliance with FMVSS in their
tires, as well as in the notifications they issue to their dealers or
other tire outlets participating in the recall campaign. See 49 CFR
573.6(c)(9). We continue to estimate that the agency administers 12
tire recalls each year, on average. We continue to estimate that the
inclusion of this additional information will require an additional two
hours of effort beyond the subtotal above associated with non-tire
recall campaigns. This additional effort consists of one hour for the
NHTSA notification and one hour for the dealer notification for a total
of 24 burden hours (12 tire recalls a year x 2 hours per recall).
Manufacturer-owned or controlled dealers are required to notify the
manufacturer and provide certain information should they deviate from
the manufacturer's disposal plan. Consistent with our previous
analysis, we continue to ascribe zero burden hours to this requirement
since to date no such reports have been provided and our original
expectation that dealers would comply with manufacturers' plans has
proven true.
Accordingly, we continue to estimate 24 burden hours a year will be
spent complying with the tire recall campaign requirements found in 49
CFR 573.6(c)(9).
[[Page 45944]]
The agency recently received one report under 49 U.S.C. 30166(n)
and its implementing regulation at 49 CFR 573.10 of a defective or
noncompliant tire being intentionally sold or leased, so our previous
estimate of zero burden hours for this regulatory requirement is being
revised. The agency estimates 1 burden hour annually will be spent
preparing and submitting such reports.
We continue to believe nine vehicle manufacturers, who did not
operate VIN-based recalls lookup systems prior to August 2013, incur
certain recurring burdens on an annual basis. We continue to estimate
that 100 burden hours will be spent on system and database
administrator support. These 100 burden hours include: Backup data
management and monitoring; database management, updates, and log
management; and data transfer, archiving, quality assurance, and
cleanup procedures. We continue to estimate another 100 burden hours
will be incurred on web/application developer support. These burdens
include: Operating system and security patch management; application/
web server management; and application server system and log files
management. We continue to estimate these burdens will total 1,800
hours each year (9 MFRs x 200 hours). We continue to estimate the
recurring costs of these burden hours will be $30,000 per
manufacturer.\4\ We continue to estimate that the total cost to the
industry from these recurring expenses will total $270,000, on an
annual basis (9 MFRs x $30,000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ $8,000 (for data center hosting for the physical server) +
$12,000 (for system and database administrator support) + $10,000
(for web/application developer support) = $30,000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Changes to 49 CFR part 573 in 2013 required 27 manufacturers to
update each recalled vehicle's repair status no less than every 7 days,
for 15 years from the date the VIN is known to be included in the
recall. This ongoing requirement to update the status of a VIN for 15
years continues to add a recurring burden on top of the one-time burden
to implement and operate these online search tools. We continue to
estimate that 8 affected motorcycle manufacturers will make recalled
VINs available for an average of 2 recalls each year and 19 affected
passenger-vehicle manufacturers will make recalled VINs available for
an average of 8 recalls each year. We believe it will take no more than
1 hour, and potentially much less with automated systems, to update the
VIN status of vehicles that have been remedied under the manufacturer's
remedy program. We continue to estimate this will require 8,736 burden
hours per year (1 hour x 2 recalls x 52 weeks x 8 MFRs + 1 hour x 8
recalls x 52 weeks x 19 MFRs) to support the requirement to update the
recalls completion status of each VIN in a recall at least weekly for
15 years.
As the number of Part 573 Recall Reports has increased in recent
years, so has the number of quarterly reports that track the completion
of safety recalls. Our previous estimate of 3,800 quarterly reports
received annually is now revised upwards to 4,498 quarter reports
received annually. We continue to estimate it takes manufacturers 10
minutes to gather the pertinent information for each quarterly report,
and 4 additional hours for the 17 major passenger-vehicle
manufacturers. We therefore now estimate that the quarterly reporting
burden pursuant to Part 573 totals 818 hours ((4,498 quarterly reports
x 10 minutes/report) + (17 MFRs x 4 hours for electronic submission)).
We continue to estimate a small burden of 2 hours annually in order
to set up a manufacturer's online recalls portal account with the
pertinent contact information and maintaining/updating their account
information as needed. We estimate this will require a total of 548
hours annually (2 hours x 274 MFRs).
We continue to estimate that 20 percent of Part 573 reports will
involve a change or addition regarding recall components, and that at
one hour per amended report, this totals 193 burden hours per year (963
recalls x .20 = 193 recalls; 193 x 1 = 193 hours).
As to the requirement that manufacturers notify NHTSA in the event
of a bankruptcy, we expect this notification to take an estimated 2
hours to draft and submit to NHTSA. We continue to estimate that only
10 manufacturers might submit such a notice to NHTSA each year, so we
calculate the total burden at 20 hours (10 MFRs x 2 hours).
We continue to estimate that it takes manufacturers an average of 8
hours to draft their notification letters, submit them to NHTSA for
review, and then finalize them for mailing to their affected owners and
purchasers. We estimate that the 49 CFR part 577 requirements result in
7,704 burden hours annually (8 hours per recall x 963 recalls per
year).
The burden estimate associated with the regulation that requires
interim owner notifications within 60 days of filing a Part 573 Safety
Recall Report must be revised upward. We previously calculated that
about 10 percent of past recalls require an interim notification
mailing, but recent trends show that 12 percent of recalls require an
interim owner notification mailing. We continue to estimate the
preparation of an interim notification can take up to 10 hours. We
therefore estimate that 1160 burden hours are associated with the 60-
day interim notification requirement (963 recalls x .12 = 116 recalls;
116 recalls times 10 hours per recall = 1160 hours).
As for costs associated with notifying owners and purchasers of
recalls, we continue to estimate a cost of $1.50 per first class mail
notification, on average. This cost estimate includes the costs of
printing, mailing, as well as the costs vehicle manufacturers may pay
to third-party vendors to acquire the names and addresses of the
current registered owners from state and territory departments of motor
vehicles. In reviewing recent recall figures, we determined that an
estimated 75.8 million letters are mailed yearly totaling $113,700,000
($1.50 per letter x 75,800,000 letters). The requirement in 49 CFR part
577 for a manufacturer to notify their affected customers within 60
days would add an additional $13,644,000 (75,800,000 letters x .12
requiring interim owner notifications = 9,096,000 letters; 9,096,000 x
$1.50 = $13,644,000). In total, we estimate that the current 49 CFR
part 577 requirements cost manufacturers a total of $127,344,000
annually ($113,700,000 for owner notification letters + $13,644,000 for
interim notification letters = $127,344,000).
NHTSA further has authority to require that, in an enforcement
action, vehicle manufacturers conduct supplemental recall
communications, potentially utilizing non-traditional means (e.g., text
messaging, social media). This is currently occurring in the Takata
recalls, which involve 19 vehicle manufacturers and over 46 million
defective inflators currently under recall in approximately 34 million
vehicles that need to be recalled as quickly as possible, given that
thirteen people in the United States have lost their lives to a
rupturing Takata inflator, and more than two hundred people have
reported associated injuries, many of which were disfiguring or life-
threatening. The scope of the Takata recall has been unprecedented in
the agency's history. Therefore, the below analysis only takes into
account the expected paperwork burden of this collection over the next
three years, without making any assumptions about the likelihood of
another large-scale recall that leads to similar types of supplementary
notices. However, the agency believes the lessons learned from the
Takata recall
[[Page 45945]]
will provide a useful guidepost in structuring any similar future
action.
To address the scope and complexity of the Takata recall, NHTSA
issued a Coordinated Remedy Order, as amended on December 9, 2016 (the
``ACRO''), which requires affected vehicle manufacturers to conduct
supplemental owner notification efforts in coordination with NHTSA and
the Independent Monitor of Takata. On December 23, 2016, the Monitor,
in consultation with NHTSA, issued Coordinated Communications
Recommendations for vehicle owner outreach (``CCRs''), which includes a
recommendation that vehicle manufacturers provide at least one form of
consumer outreach per month for vehicles in a launched recall campaign
(i.e., a recall where parts are available) until the vehicle is
remedied (unless otherwise accounted for as scrapped, stolen, exported,
or otherwise unreachable under certain procedures in the ACRO). See
CCRs ]1(b); ACRO ]]45-46. The Monitor also recommended that
manufacturers utilize at least three non-traditional means of
communication (postcards; email; telephone calls; text message; social
media) as part of their overall outreach strategy. See CCRs ]1(a). And
the Monitor recommended including in these communications certain
content, including certain safety-risk information. See id. ]2. If a
vehicle manufacturer does not wish to follow the Monitor's
recommendations, the ACRO permits the manufacturer to propose an
alternative communication strategy to NHTSA and the Monitor.
The Monitor's recommendations were adopted in significant part
because research supports that frequent notifications using non-
traditional means result in improved remedy completion.\5\ The agency
invites any additional feedback on the effectiveness of such outreach
in future enforcement actions, as well as the paperwork burden
associated with conducting that outreach.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See, e.g., GM Safety Recalls: Innovations in Customer
Outreach (NHTSA Retooling Recalls Workshop, April 28, 2015)
(recognizing efficacy of various methods of owner engagement, and
citing customer recognition of GM's ``persistence'' through multiple
postcards and letters ``seal[ing] the deal'' for customer to seek
timely recall remedy); Auto Alliance & NADA Survey Key Findings
(November 2015), at 16 (observing dealers ``[t]ry multiple attempts
and methods [phone, email, mail] to contact customer'' when trying
to increase recall repair rates).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To date, vehicle manufacturers and others have agreed that greater
notification frequency is preferred over less.\6\ However, the agency
is aware of generalized concerns about ``notification fatigue'' and
invites comment on this phenomenon, including the optimal frequency,
content, mode, and method of recall/defects notifications from
manufacturers to consumers. The agency is also particularly interested
any research or data that relates to a recall with potential
consequences of death or severe injury, as in the case of the Takata
recalls. NHTSA also seeks comment on the content and language to
include in these notifications, including relevant safety-risk
information, to increase the likelihood that consumers remedy the issue
as soon as possible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See, e.g., GM Safety Recalls, supra; Auto Alliance & NADA
Survey Key Findings, supra; GM letter to NHTSA in comment to ANPRM,
Docket No. NHTSA-2016-0001 (March 23, 2016), at 2 (``The best
approach is to leverage multiple communication channels and, where
possible, capture and use the customer's preferred method of
communication. In those cases where consumers perceive non-repair to
be low-risk, a ``saturation'' approach is sometimes effective. This
approach increases the frequency of contact and alternates the means
of communication.''); see also Susanne Schmidt & Martin Eisend,
Advertising Repetition: A Meta-Analysis on Effective Frequency in
Advertising, 44 J. Advertising 415, 425 (2015) (observing findings
``clearly support the repetitionists' view in the literature over
the minimalists' view: few exposures are not enough to achieve
maximum response, but repetition is essential for consumer
response''); id. at 426 (observing further that ``many exposures in
real-world settings are not completed (i.e. the consumer does not
read/watch/listen to an ad message in its entirety), and higher
exposure rates are necessary to reach optimum response''--
accordingly, the study's figures even ``might understate the optimum
exposure level needed in a real-world setting''); Blair Entenmann,
Marketing Help!, The Principles of Targeted Direct Mail Advertising
(2007) (``Timing may be a critical success factor--today they aren't
interested, but next month they might be. Repetition will generate a
better response.''); Chuck Flantroy, Direct Mail Works: The Power of
Frequency, Kessler Creative (August 31, 2016), available at http://www.kesslercreative.com/marketing-tips-tricks/direct-mail-works-the-power-of-frequency/ (observing that ``[a] huge factor to take into
account is the timing of . . . mailing(s). Even if your first
mailing falls on deaf ears, your second or third may come at just
the perfect time when a recipient of your campaign is in need of
your products or services'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NHTSA estimates a yearly average of 19 manufacturers will be
issuing monthly supplemental communications over the next three years
pursuant to the ACRO and the CCRs. Manufacturers may satisfy the CCRs
through third-party vendors (which have been utilized by many
manufacturers), in-house strategies, or some combination thereof. NHTSA
estimates the cost for supplemental communications at $0.44 per VIN per
month.
The volume of outreach required by the ACRO and the CCRs (and the
costs associated with that outreach) is a function of the number of
unrepaired vehicles that are in a launched campaign and are not
otherwise accounted for as scrapped, stolen, exported, or otherwise
unreachable. The schedule in Paragraph 35 of the ACRO delineates the
expected remedy completion rate, by quarter, of vehicles in a launched
remedy campaign.
Utilizing these variables, we estimate an initial annualized cost
over the next three years of $43,557,722 per year. However, NHTSA
anticipates that recent settlement agreements in the Southern District
of Florida multi-district litigation (MDL) governing economic-loss
actions against five manufacturer defendants will discount this figure
based on outreach efforts those defendants (Toyota, Subaru, Nissan,
BMW, Mazda, and Honda) are required to conduct pursuant to their
respective settlements. See generally In re: Takata Airbag Products
Liab. Litig., 14-cv-24009, MDL No. 2599 (S.D. Fla.). These outreach
programs are to utilize non-traditional methods of outreach, including
telephone, email, social media, and text messaging, and NHTSA
anticipates they will produce outreach that would satisfy the minimum
requirements of the CCRs. In calculating the estimated burden the
relevant manufacturers would have incurred under the same methodology
described above, NHTSA is discounting the annualized cost contemplated
by the ACRO and the CCRs by $15,721,393.
Accordingly, NHTSA estimates the terms of ACRO and the CCRs,
assuming remedy-completion rates consistent with those prescribed in
the former, contemplate an annualized cost of $27,836,329 per year for
the next three years (2018-2020). In addition, NHTSA estimates that
manufacturers will take an average of 2 hours each month drafting or
customizing supplemental recall communications utilizing non-
traditional means, submitting them to NHTSA for review, and finalizing
them to send to affected owners and purchasers. NHTSA therefore
estimates that 456 burden hours annually are associated with issuing
these supplemental recall communications: 12 months x 2 hours per month
x 19 manufacturers = 456 hours.
Because of the forgoing burden estimates, we are revising the
burden estimate associated with this collection. The 49 CFR part 573
and 49 CFR part 577 requirements found in today's notice will require
51,773 hours each year. Additionally, manufacturers impacted by 49 CFR
part 573 and 49 CFR part 577 requirements will incur a recurring annual
cost estimated at $127,614,000 total. The burden estimate in this
collection contemplated for conducting supplemental recall
[[Page 45946]]
communications under administrative order to achieve completion of the
Takata recalls is 456 hours each year. Additionally, that
administrative order contemplates impacted manufacturers incurring an
annual cost estimated at $27,836,329. Therefore, in total, we estimate
the burden associated with this collection to be 52,229 hours each
year, with a recurring annual cost estimated at $155,450,329.
Estimated Number of Respondents--
NHTSA estimates that there will be approximately 274 manufacturers
per year filing defect or noncompliance reports and completing the
other information collection responsibilities associated with those
filings. NHTSA estimates there will be an average of 19 manufacturers
each year conducting supplemental nontraditional monthly outreach
pursuant to administrative order in an enforcement action associated
with the Takata recall.
Jeffrey Giuseppe,
Acting Associate Administrator for Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2017-21053 Filed 9-29-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P