80_FR_46796 80 FR 46646 - Agency Requests for Approval of a New Information Collection(s): Post-Challenge Year Survey-Mayors' Challenge for Safer People and Safer Streets

80 FR 46646 - Agency Requests for Approval of a New Information Collection(s): Post-Challenge Year Survey-Mayors' Challenge for Safer People and Safer Streets

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 150 (August 5, 2015)

Page Range46646-46647
FR Document2015-19189

The Department of Transportation (DOT) invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval for a new information collection.

Federal Register, Volume 80 Issue 150 (Wednesday, August 5, 2015) 
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 150 (Wednesday, August 5, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46646-46647]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2015-19189]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

[Docket No. DOT-OST-2015-0153]


Agency Requests for Approval of a New Information Collection(s): 
Post-Challenge Year Survey--Mayors' Challenge for Safer People and 
Safer Streets

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary of Transportation, Department of 
Transportation.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Department of Transportation (DOT) invites public comments 
about our intention to request the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) approval for a new information collection.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by October 5, 2015.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments [identified by Docket No. DOT-OST-
2015-0153] through one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.

[[Page 46647]]

     Fax: 1 (202) 493-2251.
     Mail or Hand Delivery: Docket Management Facility, 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., Monday through Friday, except on Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rebecca Higgins, 202-366-7098, Office 
of Safety, Energy, and Environment, Office of the Secretary, U.S. 
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 
DC, 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    OMB Control Number:
    Title: Post-Challenge Year Survey--Mayors' Challenge for Safer 
People and Safer Streets.
    Form Numbers:
    Type of Review: New Information Collection.
    Background: Over 220 cities are voluntarily participating in the 
``Mayors' Challenge'' and through locally-driven efforts they are 
improving bike/ped safety policies, infrastructure, and awareness. This 
survey will collect information on the accomplishments of the Mayors' 
Challenge, and will be used to identify best practices and to improve 
future DOT outreach to cities. Each city has already identified a 
point-of-contact for the Mayors' Challenge. This survey will be 
distributed electronically to these POCs through an online survey tool.
    Respondents: The survey will be completed by points-of-contacts 
identified in the city agencies participating in the Mayors' Challenge.
    Number of Respondents: 230 cities have volunteered to participate 
in the Mayors' Challenge.
    Frequency: Once, upon completion of this challenge.
    Number of Annual Responses: 1.
    Total Annual Hour Burden: 30 minutes/respondent; Cumulative 115 
hours.
    Total Annual Cost Burden: $3,388 (Based on an assumption that this 
would be completed by someone at an equivalent to a GS-12 level of 
seniority, which is $29.46/hour.).

Synopsis of Information Collection

    DOT will survey the cities who have volunteered to participate in 
the Mayors' Challenge for Safer People and Safer Streets about their 
activities, successes, and obstacles. This information will be used to 
establish best practices bicycle and pedestrian safety and will 
identify gaps in data and resources that DOT can provide. The questions 
include:
    1. Which of the seven goals did you adopt, and what activities did 
you undertake to meet those goals? For reference, the seven goals are:
    (1) Take a Complete Streets approach;
    (2) Identify and address barriers;
    (3) Gather and track data;
    (4) Use context-sensitive designs;
    (5) Complete bike-ped networks;
    (6) Improve laws and regulations; and
    (7) Educate and enforce proper road use.
    2. What were the primary challenges and obstacles to bicycle and 
pedestrian safety in your community, and what if any actions did you 
take to address these challenges and obstacles?
    3. What if any changes have resulted from the challenge activities, 
including changes to physical infrastructure, decision-making 
processes, policies or procedures, enforcement, and education and 
awareness of your community?
    4. Please use the following table to indicate whether you have data 
on the impact of the Mayors' Challenge activities, and what the extent 
of that impact is.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Extent of impact
                                    Data available?     (e.g. number of
                                   (e.g. yes/no, and      bicyclists,
                                    if yes, type of       compared to
                                         data)          previous years)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
event attendance................
survey results..................
crash data......................
walking and bicycle counts......
bike lanes, sidewalks, other
 infrastructure.
new plans, policies, laws, or
 campaigns.
other indications of political
 and community support.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. Which DOT resources, tools, and data were most useful in your 
challenge?
    6. Which non-DOT resources, tools, and data were most useful in 
your challenge?
    7. What resources, tools, and data did you wish were available?
    8. What are the most useful formats for receiving information from 
USDOT, and why (e.g. webinars, in-person meetings, conference calls, 
etc.)?
    9. What efforts in your city to improve bicycle and pedestrian 
safety in your community were already underway at the time of the 
Mayors' Challenge? How did the Mayors' Challenge add value and/or help 
to fill any gaps in your city's efforts to improve bicycle and 
pedestrian safety?
    10. In planning and project delivery of pedestrian and/or bicycle 
infrastructure projects, to what extent has your city coordinated with 
your Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), Regional Planning 
Organization (RPO), State Department of Transportation (DOT), and 
Federal Regional/Division office partners? Please note type of outreach 
and coordination, and outcomes it led to.
    11. What were the key benefits and lessons learned as a result of 
the Mayors' Challenge?
    12. Do you think the Mayors' challenge helped make any permanent 
changes in pedestrian and bike safety and accommodation in your city/
town?
    We are required to publish this notice in the Federal Register by 
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13.
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of 
this information collection, including (a) Whether the proposed 
collection of information is necessary for the Department's 
performance; (b) the accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for the 
Department to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the 
information collection; and (d) ways that the burden could be minimized 
without reducing the quality of the collected information. The agency 
will summarize and/or include your comments in the request for OMB's 
clearance of this information collection.

    Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. 
chapter 35, as amended; and 49 CFR 1.48.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on July 29, 2015.
Barbara McCann,
Director, Office of Safety, Energy, and Environment, Office of Policy, 
U.S. Department of Transportation.
[FR Doc. 2015-19189 Filed 8-4-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P

46646 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 150 / Wednesday, August 5, 2015 / Notices conformity and associated documents with FMVSS No. 121. Should any part reports not submitted as part of the (referred to as a ‘‘conformity package’’) not be present, or prevent compliance petition, must be provided with each the RI must submit to NHTSA under 49 with the requirements of the standard as conformity package. CFR 592.6(d) to obtain release of the installed, modification of the bus and Decision DOT Conformance bond furnished at proof of conformance after modification the time the vehicle is imported. must be included with each conformity Accordingly, on the basis of the Because it is common practice for package. foregoing, NHTSA hereby decides that transit bus bodies to have seating and S5.1.1—Data related to reservoir volumes MY 2000 East Lancashire Coachbuilders other interior modifications made necessary to demonstrate conformance to Limited Double Decker Tri-Axle buses during use for the purposes of update compressor recharge rate. (mounted on a Volvo B7L Chassis), that and repair, it is expected that after many S5.1.2.3—Check valves to protect against were not originally manufactured to years in service at least some of the reservoir air loss. comply with all applicable FMVSS, are buses eligible for importation under this S5.1.2.4—Manually operated condensate capable of being altered to conform to decision will not have the same interior drain valve for reservoirs. all applicable Federal Motor Vehicle configuration, controls and displays, S5.1.4—In-dash pressure gauge. Safety Standards. etc., as the vehicle(s) described in the S5.1.5—Device that gives a low pressure petition. Therefore, NHTSA has decided warning in accordance with this section. Vehicle Eligibility Number for Subject that RIs must also include in each S5.1.8(a)—Automatic slack adjusters. Vehicles S5.1.6.2—In-dash ABS malfunction conformity package specific proof to indicator lamp/check lamp function. The importer of a vehicle admissible confirm that the vehicle was originally S5.6.4—Identification of the method of under any final decision must indicate manufactured to conform to, or was control operation of the parking brake on the form HS–7 accompanying entry successfully altered to conform to, each control. the appropriate vehicle eligibility applicable standard. Any components number indicating that the vehicle is Photographs of all brake system that differ from the original equipment eligible for entry. VCP–59 is the vehicle related controls and displays must also installed on the vehicle must be fully eligibility number assigned to vehicles be included in each conformity package. described, and if the presence of that admissible under this notice of final Standard No. 124—Accelerator component could impact the vehicle’s decision. Control Systems: Installation of a compliance with an applicable safety Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: specific accelerator control system to standard, the conformity package must Delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.95 and include reports of testing or inspection meet the requirements of this standard was described in the petition. 501.8. sufficient to establish the vehicle’s Documentation showing that, as Issued on: July 30, 2015. compliance with that standard with the component installed. This additional modified, the vehicle conforms to the John Finneran, information must also be supplied any standard must be provided in each Acting Director, Office of Vehicle Safety time an alteration that requires conformity package. Compliance. replacement of a nonconforming system, Standard No. 205—Glazing Materials: [FR Doc. 2015–19210 Filed 8–4–15; 8:45 am] such as the vehicle driver’s seat or All glazing replaced to meet the BILLING CODE 4910–59–P accelerator control system, differs from requirements of FMVSS No. 217 must that originally described in the petition. also meet all applicable requirements of In addition to the modifications FMVSS No. 205. In addition, all glazing DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION described in the petition as needed to must be inspected for compliance with [Docket No. DOT–OST–2015–0153] conform the vehicle to all applicable FMVSS No. 205. Any noncompliant FMVSS, NHTSA has decided that glazing must be replaced with Agency Requests for Approval of a additional or alternative modifications compliant glazing and proof of New Information Collection(s): Post- must be performed, and, for some of compliance must be included in each Challenge Year Survey—Mayors’ those modifications, proof of conformity package. Challenge for Safer People and Safer conformance must be provided in the Standard No. 217—Bus Emergency Streets conformity package, as set forth below. Exits and Window Retention and Standard No. 108—Lamps, Reflective Release: The petition states that the AGENCY: Office of the Secretary of Devices and Associated Equipment: The vehicles must be modified by Transportation, Department of conformity package must include installation of an emergency escape Transportation. documentation from the lighting hatch and emergency escape windows ACTION: Notice and request for manufacturer for each lamp mounted on in a manner consistent with the comments. the bus showing that the lamp has been requirements of this standard. Test certified as conforming to FMVSS No. reports were submitted in an effort to SUMMARY: The Department of 108 for the purpose for which the lamp demonstrate that compliance with the Transportation (DOT) invites public is used. Specific proof that the standard can be achieved after these comments about our intention to request headlamps meet the operating voltage modifications are performed. the Office of Management and Budget requirements of FMVSS No. 108 must Photographs (including images of all (OMB) approval for a new information also be provided in the conformity required labeling) and bus plan view collection. package. drawings showing the location and DATES: Written comments should be asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Standard No. 121—Air Brake Systems: operation of all exits, must be provided submitted by October 5, 2015. Inspection of each bus to specifically with each conformity package. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments verify that the critical components listed Standard No. 302—Flammability of [identified by Docket No. DOT–OST– below (by the applicable paragraph in Interior Materials: Documentation 2015–0153] through one of the FMVSS No. 121) are present, are showing how the RI has confirmed that following methods: significantly similar to those originally all interior components on each bus • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// installed on the Volvo B7L chassis and conform to all applicable requirements www.regulations.gov. Follow the online function as required for compliance of this standard, including any test instructions for submitting comments. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:54 Aug 04, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00109 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\05AUN1.SGM 05AUN1

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 150 / Wednesday, August 5, 2015 / Notices 46647 • Fax: 1 (202) 493–2251. has already identified a point-of-contact safety and will identify gaps in data and • Mail or Hand Delivery: Docket for the Mayors’ Challenge. This survey resources that DOT can provide. The Management Facility, U.S. Department will be distributed electronically to questions include: of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey these POCs through an online survey 1. Which of the seven goals did you Avenue SE., West Building, Room W12– tool. adopt, and what activities did you 140, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 Respondents: The survey will be undertake to meet those goals? For a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through completed by points-of-contacts reference, the seven goals are: Friday, except on Federal holidays. identified in the city agencies (1) Take a Complete Streets approach; FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: participating in the Mayors’ Challenge. (2) Identify and address barriers; Rebecca Higgins, 202–366–7098, Office Number of Respondents: 230 cities (3) Gather and track data; of Safety, Energy, and Environment, have volunteered to participate in the (4) Use context-sensitive designs; Office of the Secretary, U.S. Department Mayors’ Challenge. (5) Complete bike-ped networks; of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Frequency: Once, upon completion of this challenge. (6) Improve laws and regulations; and Avenue SE., Washington, DC, 20590. Number of Annual Responses: 1. (7) Educate and enforce proper road SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Total Annual Hour Burden: 30 use. OMB Control Number: Title: Post-Challenge Year Survey— minutes/respondent; Cumulative 115 2. What were the primary challenges Mayors’ Challenge for Safer People and hours. and obstacles to bicycle and pedestrian Safer Streets. Total Annual Cost Burden: $3,388 safety in your community, and what if Form Numbers: (Based on an assumption that this any actions did you take to address Type of Review: New Information would be completed by someone at an these challenges and obstacles? Collection. equivalent to a GS–12 level of seniority, 3. What if any changes have resulted Background: Over 220 cities are which is $29.46/hour.). from the challenge activities, including voluntarily participating in the changes to physical infrastructure, ‘‘Mayors’ Challenge’’ and through Synopsis of Information Collection decision-making processes, policies or locally-driven efforts they are improving DOT will survey the cities who have procedures, enforcement, and education bike/ped safety policies, infrastructure, volunteered to participate in the and awareness of your community? and awareness. This survey will collect Mayors’ Challenge for Safer People and 4. Please use the following table to information on the accomplishments of Safer Streets about their activities, indicate whether you have data on the the Mayors’ Challenge, and will be used successes, and obstacles. This impact of the Mayors’ Challenge to identify best practices and to improve information will be used to establish activities, and what the extent of that future DOT outreach to cities. Each city best practices bicycle and pedestrian impact is. Extent of impact Data available? (e.g. yes/no, and if (e.g. number of bicyclists, com- yes, type of data) pared to previous years) event attendance. survey results. crash data. walking and bicycle counts. bike lanes, sidewalks, other infrastructure. new plans, policies, laws, or campaigns. other indications of political and community support. 5. Which DOT resources, tools, and Planning Organization (MPO), Regional Department’s performance; (b) the data were most useful in your Planning Organization (RPO), State accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) challenge? Department of Transportation (DOT), ways for the Department to enhance the 6. Which non-DOT resources, tools, and Federal Regional/Division office quality, utility and clarity of the and data were most useful in your partners? Please note type of outreach information collection; and (d) ways challenge? and coordination, and outcomes it led that the burden could be minimized 7. What resources, tools, and data did to. without reducing the quality of the you wish were available? 11. What were the key benefits and collected information. The agency will 8. What are the most useful formats lessons learned as a result of the summarize and/or include your for receiving information from USDOT, Mayors’ Challenge? and why (e.g. webinars, in-person comments in the request for OMB’s meetings, conference calls, etc.)? 12. Do you think the Mayors’ clearance of this information collection. 9. What efforts in your city to improve challenge helped make any permanent Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act bicycle and pedestrian safety in your changes in pedestrian and bike safety of 1995; 44 U.S.C. chapter 35, as amended; community were already underway at and accommodation in your city/town? and 49 CFR 1.48. We are required to publish this notice asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES the time of the Mayors’ Challenge? How in the Federal Register by the Issued in Washington, DC, on July 29, did the Mayors’ Challenge add value 2015. and/or help to fill any gaps in your Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, city’s efforts to improve bicycle and Public Law 104–13. Barbara McCann, pedestrian safety? Public Comments Invited: You are Director, Office of Safety, Energy, and 10. In planning and project delivery of asked to comment on any aspect of this Environment, Office of Policy, U.S. pedestrian and/or bicycle infrastructure information collection, including (a) Department of Transportation. projects, to what extent has your city Whether the proposed collection of [FR Doc. 2015–19189 Filed 8–4–15; 8:45 am] coordinated with your Metropolitan information is necessary for the BILLING CODE 4910–9X–P VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:54 Aug 04, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00110 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\05AUN1.SGM 05AUN1


Document Created: 2018-02-23 10:53:03
Document Modified: 2018-02-23 10:53:03
CategoryRegulatory Information
CollectionFederal Register
sudoc ClassAE 2.7:
GS 4.107:
AE 2.106:
PublisherOffice of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
SectionNotices
ActionNotice and request for comments.
DatesWritten comments should be submitted by October 5, 2015.
ContactRebecca Higgins, 202-366-7098, Office of Safety, Energy, and Environment, Office of the Secretary, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, 20590.
FR Citation80 FR 46646 
2024 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR