30 Day FR Notice Published

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 82 / Wednesday, April 30, 2025 / Notices
amended; 49 CFR 1.49; and DOT Order
1351.29A.
Cem Hatipoglu,
Associate Administrator, Office of Vehicle
Safety Research.
[FR Doc. 2025–07447 Filed 4–29–25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P

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
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.
AGENCY:

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 onetime, voluntary, and anonymous survey
of motorcycle riders to obtain consumerreported 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

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1

SUMMARY:

VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:50 Apr 29, 2025

Jkt 265001

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

PO 00000

Frm 00089

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

17997

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

E:\FR\FM\30APN1.SGM

30APN1

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1

17998

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 82 / Wednesday, April 30, 2025 / Notices

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

VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:50 Apr 29, 2025

Jkt 265001

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.

PO 00000

Frm 00090

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

TABLE 1—RECOMMENDATIONS BY THE
AMERICAN MOTORCYCLIST ASSOCIATION
AMA data of
interest

Originally
in survey

Number of years
respondent has
ridden.

No ............

Miles travelled per
year.

No ............

Type of motorcycle
On- or off-road
riding.
Engine size ..........

Yes.
Yes.

Safety training history.

No ............

Crash history ........

Yes.

No ............

Change to
survey
Added to
the survey instrument.
Added to
the survey instrument.

Added to
the survey instrument.
Added to
the survey instrument.

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

E:\FR\FM\30APN1.SGM

30APN1

17999

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 82 / Wednesday, April 30, 2025 / Notices
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
MRF data of
interest

Originally
in survey

Change to
survey

Type of motorcycles the respondent currently rides.
Engine size ..........

Yes.

Number of motorcycles owned.
Number of years
riding.

Yes.

Average number
of miles ridden
annually.

No ............

No ............

No ............

Added to
the survey instrument.
Added to
the survey instrument.
Added to
the survey instrument.

TABLE 2—RECOMMENDATIONS BY THE sample size of 300 completed surveys is
MOTORCYCLE RIDERS FOUNDA- achieved.
TION—Continued
Initial outreach for respondents is
MRF data of
interest

Originally
in survey

Motorcycle safety
training history.

No ............

Geographic location.
Age .......................
Crash history ........

Yes.

Change to
survey
Added to
the survey instrument.

Yes.
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

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.

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1

TABLE 3—BURDEN ESTIMATES
Number of
respondents

Time per
response
(min)

Frequency of
response

Time burden
(hours)

NHSTA Form No.

Information collection

1811 ........................................
1812 ........................................
1813 ........................................

Eligibility Questionnaire ..............................
Informed Consent .......................................
Full Questionnaire ......................................

700
420
420

1
1
15

1
1
1

12
7
105

Annual Burden .................

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

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

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

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

124

The annual burden for administration
of the survey is 124 hours.
Estimated Annual Burden Cost: $0.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:50 Apr 29, 2025

Jkt 265001

There is no cost to the respondents for
this information collection.
Respondents will not incur travel

PO 00000

Frm 00091

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

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

E:\FR\FM\30APN1.SGM

30APN1

18000

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 82 / Wednesday, April 30, 2025 / Notices

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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Internal Revenue Service
Agency Collection Activities;
Requesting Comments on Form 13751
Internal Revenue Service (IRS),
Treasury.
ACTION: Notice and request for
comments.
AGENCY:

The Internal Revenue Service,
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 continuing
information collections, as required by
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
The IRS is soliciting comments
concerning Form 13751, Waiver of Right
to Consistent Agreement of Partnership
Items and Partnership-Level

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1

SUMMARY:

VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:50 Apr 29, 2025

Jkt 265001

Determinations as to Penalties,
Additions to Tax, and Additional
Amounts.
DATES: Written comments should be
received on or before June 30, 2025 to
be assured of consideration.
ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments
to Andres Garcia, Internal Revenue
Service, Room 6526, 1111 Constitution
Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20224, or
by email to pra.comments@irs.gov.
Include OMB Control No. 1545–1969 in
the subject line of the message.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Requests for additional information or
copies of the form should be directed to
Jason Schoonmaker, (801) 620–2128, at
Internal Revenue Service, Room 6526,
1111 Constitution Avenue NW,
Washington, DC 20224, or through the
internet at jason.m.schoonmaker@
irs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The IRS is
currently seeking comments concerning
the following information collection
tools, reporting, and record-keeping
requirements:
Title: Waiver of Right to Consistent
Agreement of Partnership Items and
Partnership-Level Determinations as to
Penalties, Additions to Tax, and
Additional Amounts.
OMB Number: 1545–1969.
Form Number: 13751.
Abstract: Form 13751 is used to
determine the eligibility for
participation in the settlement initiative
of taxpayers related through TEFRA
partnerships to ineligible applicants.
Such determinations will involve
partnership items and partnership-level
determinations, as well as the
calculation of tax liabilities resolved
under this initiative, including penalties
and interest.
Current Actions: There is no change to
the burden previously approved by
OMB. This submission is for renewal
purposes.
Type of Review: Extension of a
currently approved collection.
Affected Public: Individuals or
households, Business or other for-profit
organizations, not-for-profit institutions.

PO 00000

Frm 00092

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 9990

Estimated Number of Respondents:
100.
Estimated Time Per Respondent: 1
hours.
Estimated Total Annual Burden
Hours: 100 hours.
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. All comments will become a
matter 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 shall have 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 respondents, including
through the use of automated collection
techniques 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: April 24, 2025.
Jason M. Schoonmaker,
Tax Analyst.
[FR Doc. 2025–07441 Filed 4–29–25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830–01–P

E:\FR\FM\30APN1.SGM

30APN1