[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 82 (Wednesday, April 30, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17997-18000]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-07448]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2024-0024]
Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the
Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Motorcycle
Crash Avoidance Technology Review
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
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 (PRA),
this notice announces that the Information Collection Request (ICR)
summarized below will be submitted to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) for review and approval. This document describes a new
collection of information for which NHTSA intends to seek OMB approval
titled ``Motorcycle Crash Avoidance Technology Review.'' The new
information collection would be a one-time, voluntary, and anonymous
survey of motorcycle riders to obtain consumer-reported feedback and
perspectives on the use and availability of advanced crash avoidance
motorcycle technologies. A Federal Register Notice with a 60-day
comment period soliciting comments on the following information
collection was published on June 12, 2024. Three comments were received
during the comment period. This 30-day notice includes a summary of
those comments and responses. NHTSA has addressed these comments, but
there are no resulting changes to the estimated burden.
DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before May 30, 2025.
ADDRESSES: Written comments and recommendations for the proposed
information collection, including suggestions for reducing burden,
should be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget at
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. To find this particular information
collection, select ``Currently under Review--Open for Public Comment''
or use the search function.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information or access
to background documents, contact Mr. Ryan Rahimpour, NHTSA, Office of
Vehicle Safety Research, (202) 366-8756, W46-432, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590,
Ryan.rahimpour@dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), a
Federal agency must receive approval from OMB before it collects
certain information from the public, and a person is not required to
respond to a collection of information by a Federal agency unless the
collection displays a valid OMB control number. In compliance with
these requirements, this notice announces that the following
information collection request will be submitted OMB.
Title: Motorcycle Crash Avoidance Technology Review.
OMB Control Number: New.
Form Number(s): Eligibility Questionnaire, NHTSA Form 1811;
Informed Consent, NHTSA Form 1812; Full Questionnaire, NHTSA Form 1813.
Type of Request: New information collection.
Type of Review Requested: Regular.
Length of Approval Requested: One year from date of approval.
Summary of the Collection of Information: NHTSA is seeking approval
to conduct three voluntary, one-time information collections that would
be part of a survey of motorcycle riders to obtain consumer-reported
feedback and perspectives on the use and availability of advanced crash
avoidance motorcycle technologies. These information collections will
be administered to a convenience sample of motorcycle riders and will
collect information on current consumer perceptions of the utility and
availability of the technologies, including consumer willingness to use
advanced safety technology on motorcycles and how various contextual
factors will impact that willingness to use. This collection is part of
a larger effort to gather data and summarize the scope of motorcycle
crashes, estimate the prevalence of different crash avoidance
technologies available in the fleet, understand the crash avoidance
technologies under development, and identify perspectives on advanced
motorcycle technologies.
The three information collections include (1) an eligibility
questionnaire; (2) an informed consent form; and (3) the survey
questionnaire. The survey will ask respondents for background
information on themselves (demographics, riding behavior, and safety
habits like helmet use) to gauge whether knowledge and beliefs about
motorcycle systems differ by any of these variables. The survey will
ask respondents about their knowledge and beliefs regarding motorcycle
safety technology using open-ended questions. These questions will
assess consumer willingness to use various motorcycle technologies and
their perspectives on the impact of various contextual factors (e.g.,
personal beliefs, mandates, costs).
Technologies include braking systems (anti-lock braking,
combined braking, automatic emergency braking); warning systems (lane
departure, blind spot, curve speed, forward collision, and rear
collision); and control systems (stability control and wheelie
control).
Open-ended questions aim to gather unbiased perspectives
and allow a measure of accuracy of information available to consumers
and users. Additionally, overall thoughts on technologies provide
insight into user acceptance and can be evaluated by demographics and
user characteristics.
Willingness to purchase and use technologies provides
perspective for incentivized incorporation of technologies and
potential disengagement or modification to make inoperative.
Cost considerations provide insight for potential policy
decisions as they relate to cost-benefit analyses.
Description of the Need for the Information and Proposed Use of the
Information: NHTSA's mission is to save lives, prevent injuries, and
reduce the economic costs of road traffic crashes through education,
research, safety standards, and enforcement activity. Subchapter V of
Chapter 301 of Title 49 of the United States Code (U.S.C.) authorizes
the Secretary of Transportation to conduct ``motor vehicle safety
research, development, and testing programs and activities, including
activities related to new and emerging technologies that impact or may
impact motor vehicle safety'' (49 U.S.C. 30182). Pursuant to Section
1.95 of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), the
Secretary has delegated this authority to NHTSA.
As crash avoidance technologies advance, they have the potential to
reduce the loss of life in roadway crashes. NHTSA is looking to gather
information regarding consumer use and understanding of current
advanced safety technology on motorcycles. The results of the
information collection will help NHTSA better understand consumer-based
barriers and facilitators
[[Page 17998]]
to advanced motorcycle crash avoidance technology deployment. By
understanding these barriers and facilitators, NHTSA can better develop
related policy and consumer education materials to improve safety
through the increased uptake and safe use of advanced technologies for
motorcycles.
60-Day Notice: A Federal Register notice with a 60-day comment
period soliciting public comments on the following information
collection was published on June 12, 2024 (89 FR 50042) to which NHTSA
received three comments.
The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) welcomed ``any
addition to the current state of knowledge in motorcyclist safety, [and
they] strongly discourage[d] NHTSA from delaying possible rulemaking on
motorcycle ABS by waiting for these survey results.'' IIHS further
supported public comment in the opportunity for individuals or
organizations to provide feedback, regardless of selection for
participation in the survey. IIHS referenced and appended its existing
petition for rulemaking on FMVSS No. 122 and requested that the
petition be granted. IIHS did not comment on the burden calculations or
methodology of the information collection at hand.
Response: NHTSA acknowledges support for the collection of
additional information regarding motorcyclist safety. The results of
the consumer survey may be considered during contemplation of future
research and Agency activities. NHTSA is reviewing the IIHS petition as
part of the standard regulatory process. Because IIHS did not comment
regarding burden calculation or methodology, no changes have been made
to the survey design or instrument based on IIHS's comment.
The American Motorcyclist Association (AMA) provided a written
comment in which they ``support the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration seeking public comments on issues regarding motorcycle
safety and safety technology.'' The AMA emphasized the importance of
direct feedback from the motorcycling community and expressed some
previously stated concerns regarding emerging technology and
interactions with motorcycles and motorcyclists. Specifically, AMA
highlighted the concern regarding a lack of data on how AEB systems
would respond to other vehicle types such as heavy vehicles or
motorcycles, as included in NHTSA's May 2024 Final Rule on automatic
emergency braking. Additionally, AMA suggested that information to be
collected in the survey and motorcycle safety recommendations are
available through other efforts organized by NHTSA. AMA referenced the
first of seven meetings to update the National Agenda for Motorcycle
Safety (NAMS). They also referenced the newly reestablished
Motorcyclist Advisory Council (MAC), which will ``coordinate and advise
the Secretary of Transportation, NHTSA, and the Federal Highway
Administration on transportation issues specific to motorcyclists.''
Regarding survey design, the AMA stated the previous notice did not
indicate a survey design that equal distributes participants across
segments of the motorcycling community. They noted that responses may
differ depending on the number of years riding, number of miles
traveled per year, type of motorcycle, on or off-road riding, engine
size, safety training history, and crash history.
Response: The MAC and NAMS are part of NHTSA's overall strategy for
improving motorcycle safety. These initiatives work together to ensure
that the diverse motorcycling community is well-represented, including
fair and comprehensive inclusion of all riding segments. Both efforts
were at the initial stages of activity in 2024 and scope and expected
deliverables for each are currently pending review in the Office of the
Secretary. The Agency benefits by initiating this collection of
information from consumers while the NAMS update and the MAC are
underway. This survey will collect consumer feedback on new and
emerging safety technologies for motorcycles--information currently
unavailable to the agency. The efforts and breadth of information
collected through this survey, the NAMS update and the MAC can
complement and support one another.
As stated, the AMA noted concerns regarding differences in response
based on segments of the motorcycling community. The survey is not
designed to stratify respondents by population segments, but the survey
is collecting information about specific rider characteristics and
history. The analysis will take these data into consideration post
collection. Table 1 below identifies the data of interest discussed by
the AMA, whether the survey originally included this information for
collection and analysis, if the survey instrument has been adjusted to
accommodate for that data, and if not, the justification for not
including that data collection.
Table 1--Recommendations by the American Motorcyclist Association
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally in
AMA data of interest survey Change to survey
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of years respondent has No................ Added to the
ridden. survey
instrument.
Miles travelled per year........ No................ Added to the
survey
instrument.
Type of motorcycle.............. Yes...............
On- or off-road riding.......... Yes...............
Engine size..................... No................ Added to the
survey
instrument.
Safety training history......... No................ Added to the
survey
instrument.
Crash history................... Yes...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NHTSA and its research partner have modified the survey
questionnaire based on the above feedback from AMA. While four
questions were added to the instrument, NHTSA does not believe this
will change the average time of survey completion; therefore, these
modifications will not result in any changes in the burden estimates.
The Motorcycle Riders Foundation (MRF) ``applauds the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration for attempting to understand the
views of motorcyclists regarding crash avoidance technology.'' Noting
that ``motorcyclists are an afterthought,'' the organization states
appreciation in seeking to survey riders.
The MRF subsequently offers two key points regarding the proposed
survey. The first is that they believed that questions or phrasing that
push respondents to side with certain safety features should be
avoided, encouraging a fair and neutral survey. Secondly, the MRF noted
the diversity of the motorcycling community and suggests that the
respondents be selected to include specific rider characteristics.
Table 2 provides those data of interest included in the MRF comment. In
a related statement, the MRF stated concern with the selected sample
size of 300 as potentially not representing segments of the
motorcycling community. The MRF did not directly request an increase in
sample size but acknowledged the increase in
[[Page 17999]]
information if the sample size were expanded.
Response: NHTSA has coordinated with its research partner to ensure
that the survey questions are objective, unbiased, and representative.
With regard to inclusion of a broad representation of the motorcycling
community, NHTSA is not collecting data in a stratified sampling
methodology; rather, the agency is using a self-selection method of
riders that collects characteristics to be used during data analysis.
The information collection is a convenience sample and not designed as
a nationally representative sample, thus the 300 completed surveys are
believed to be sufficient to meet the objectives of the study. Table 2
shows the data of interest included in the MRF comment, an indication
of whether that data was included for collection in the original survey
instrument, and whether the survey instrument will change based on this
comment.
Table 2--Recommendations by the Motorcycle Riders Foundation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally in
MRF data of interest survey Change to survey
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Type of motorcycles the Yes...............
respondent currently rides.
Engine size..................... No................ Added to the
survey
instrument.
Number of motorcycles owned..... Yes...............
Number of years riding.......... No................ Added to the
survey
instrument.
Average number of miles ridden No................ Added to the
annually. survey
instrument.
Motorcycle safety training No................ Added to the
history. survey
instrument.
Geographic location............. Yes...............
Age............................. Yes...............
Crash history................... Yes...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NHTSA and its research partner will modify the survey questionnaire
based on the above feedback from MRF. The four questions added to the
survey instrument are the same questions identified by the AMA. There
are no additional questions added in response to the MRF comments
beyond those; therefore, no additional modifications have been made to
the questionnaire, and no resulting changes have been made to the
burden estimates.
Affected Public: General public with motorcycle experience.
Estimated Number of Respondents: Initial outreach for respondents
is targeted to reach 700 individuals. 420 individuals will move forward
to the informed consent document and the survey questionnaire.
Frequency: Once.
Estimated Annual Burden Hours: 124 hours.
This information collection request involves three information
collections: (1) an eligibility questionnaire; (2) an informed consent
form; and (3) the survey questionnaire. The administration of each of
these information collections is completely electronic as well as the
solicitation of respondents through targeted advertisements and
motorcycle community web pages. The survey involves a convenience
sample and will remain available for completion until a sample size of
300 completed surveys is achieved.
Initial outreach for respondents is targeted to reach 700
individuals willing to initiate the survey (in order to arrive at the
final desired sample size of 300). The landing page for the survey is a
three-question eligibility questionnaire, with an estimated time for
completion of one minute. Because this is a new format for gathering
this type of information from this community, the research team
estimates that 60 percent of the individuals who take the eligibility
questionnaire will qualify to move forward. Therefore, 420 individuals
will move forward to the informed consent document. It is assumed that
all 420 individuals will complete the informed consent, which is also
expected to take an average of one minute.
While all 420 respondents are expected to move forward for the
survey questionnaire, the research team expects some non-response and
some attrition of respondents. The research team is looking for 300
completed questionnaires, so the 420 respondents are considered the
maximum number of respondents needed to arrive at 300 completed
questionnaires. A completed survey questionnaire is estimated to take
on average 15 minutes. As noted in the discussion of the public
comments, four questions were added to the survey questionnaire in
response to the comments. However, these questions are not expected to
change the estimated average completion time of the survey. The
estimate of an average of 15 minutes of completion was, and remains, a
generous estimate of expected time.
Full administration of the survey is expected to be completed
within one year, and therefore, burden hours are both total and annual
estimates.
Table 3--Burden Estimates
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Information Number of Time per Frequency of Time burden
NHSTA Form No. collection respondents response (min) response (hours)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1811.......................... Eligibility 700 1 1 12
Questionnaire.
1812.......................... Informed Consent 420 1 1 7
1813.......................... Full 420 15 1 105
Questionnaire.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Annual Burden............. ................ .............. .............. .............. 124
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The annual burden for administration of the survey is 124 hours.
Estimated Annual Burden Cost: $0.
There is no cost to the respondents for this information
collection. Respondents will not incur travel expenses nor be required
to obtain equipment for completion of the survey.
Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this
[[Page 18000]]
information collection, including (a) whether the proposed collection
of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions
of the agency, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways
to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection techniques or other forms of information
technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.
Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter
35, as amended; 49 CFR 1.49; and DOT Order 1351.29A.
Cem Hatipoglu,
Associate Administrator, Office of Vehicle Safety Research.
[FR Doc. 2025-07448 Filed 4-29-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P