[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 143 (Friday, July 25, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40089-40090]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-19629]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION


Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; 
Comment Request; Extension

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Trade Commission (FTC or Commission) is announcing 
an opportunity for public comment on the proposed extension of OMB 
approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act for ``collection of 
information'' requirements contained in the Alternative Fuel Rule, 16 
CFR Part 309.

DATES: Submit written comments on the collection of information on or 
before September 23, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Elaine W. Crockett, Attorney, 
Office of the General Counsel, Room 598, 6th St. and Pennsylvania Ave., 
N.W., Washington, DC 20580. All comments should be identified as 
responding to this notice.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 
(PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal agencies must obtain approval from 
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of 
information they conduct or sponsor. ``Collection of information'' is 
defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes agency 
requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, 
keep records, or provide information to a third party. As required by 
section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, the FTC is providing this opportunity 
for public comment before requesting that OMB extend the existing 
paperwork clearance for the Alternative Fuel Rule.
    The FTC invites comments on: (1) Whether the proposed collection of 
information is necessary for the proper performance of the FTC's 
functions, including whether the information will have practical 
utility; (2) the accuracy of the FTC's estimate of the burden of the 
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the 
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, 
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways 
to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, 
including through the use of automated collection techniques, when 
appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

Alternative Fuel Rule, 16 CFR Part 309--(OMB Control Number 3084-
0094)--Extension

    The Energy Policy Act of 1992 (``EPA 92'') established a 
comprehensive national energy policy to increase U.S. energy security 
gradually and steadily in cost-effective and environmentally beneficial 
ways. EPA 92 directed the Commission to establish uniform labeling 
requirements for alternative fuels, i.e., non-liquid alternative fuels, 
and alternative fueled vehicles (AFVs). (A separate FTC Rule, the Fuel 
Rating Rule, 16 CFR Part 306, implements a statutory requirement that 
refiners, producers and importers of liquid automotive fuels must 
determine the fuel rating of the automotive fuels that they distribute, 
which include liquid alternative fuels. Both Rules contain requirements 
relating to fuel rating determinations, certifications, posting, and 
recordkeeping.)
    On May 9, 1995, the Commission issued the Alternative Fuel Rule, 
which requires disclosure of specific information on labels posted on 
fuel dispensers for non-liquid alternative fuels, and on labels on 
AFVs. To ensure the accuracy of the labeling disclosures, the Rule also 
requires that sellers maintain records substantiating the product-
specific disclosures that they include on these labels. The labeling 
requirements provide consumers with reliable and comparable information 
about the fuel ratings of similar types of fuel land alternative fueled 
vehicles. The primary purpose of the recordkeeping requirements is to 
preserve evidence of compliance with the Rule.
    Burden statement: The Rule primarily establishes determination, 
certification, labeling, and recordkeeping requirements. When the Rule 
was issued in 1995, the FTC found that the non-liquid alternative 
vehicle fuel industry consisted of approximately 1,600 members, of 
which approximately 1,300 import, produce, refine, distribute or retail 
compressed natural gas to the public for use in alternative vehicles. 
The FTC estimated that approximately 50 industry members manufacture or 
distribute electric vehicle fuel dispensing systems and that no more 
than 250 companies retail electricity to the public through electric 
vehicle fuel dispensing systems. In addition, the FTC found that 
approximately 58 companies manufacture alternative fueled vehicles. 
These companies also are subject to labeling and recordkeeping 
requirements. Staff at Department of Energy inform us that current 
numbers are approximately the same as they were in 1995.
    All of the requirements relating to the processes involved in fuel 
rating determination, certification, labeling, and recordkeeping also 
remain the same. No provisions in the Alternative Fuel Rule have been 
amended or changed in any manner. We have, however, reduced the 1995 
total burden estimate of 22,500 hours because, as stated in the 
original application for PRA clearance, it is now and always has been 
common practice for industry members to determine and monitor fuel 
ratings in the normal course of their business activities. This is 
because industry members must know and determine the fuel ratings of 
their products in order to monitor quality and determine how to market 
them. The 1995 burden estimates were based on the recognition that the 
Rule would initially create a burden of implementing a system that 
standardizes the various processes involved. Burden, as defined by OMB, 
means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by 
persons to generate, maintain, retain, disclose or provide information 
to or for a Federal agency. 5 CFR 1320.2(b)(1). Accordingly, in 1995, 
we estimated the burden hours as follows:

[[Page 40090]]

    Fuel Rating Determination: 2 hours  x  350 industry members = 700 
burden hours.
    Fuel Rating Certification: 24 hours  x  350 industry members = 
8,400 burden hours.
    Labeling: 1 hour  x  1,400 industry members = 1,400 burden hours.
    Recordkeeping associated with fuel rating determination and 
certification: 6 minutes  x  1,600 industry members = 160 burden hours.
    AFV labeling: producing: 2.5 hours  x  40 models = 100 burden 
hours; posting: 2 minutes  x  350,000 AFVs = 11,667 burden hours; 
recordkeeping: 30 minutes  x  58 industry members = 29 burden hours.
    Total 1995 burden hours: 22,500 (rounded).
    As indicated above, ``burden'' for OMB purposes is defined to 
exclude effort that would be expended regardless of any regulatory 
requirement. 5 CFR 1320.2(b)(2). One-time letters of certification or 
the use of permanent marks or labels on electric vehicle fuel 
dispensing systems may be used once and thereafter remain in effect for 
several years. Also, the specifications for labels were designed to 
produce a label that would withstand the elements for several years. 
Nonetheless, there is still some burden associated with producing, 
distributing, posting, and maintaining new labels. There also will be 
some burden associated with new or revised certification of fuel 
ratings. Accordingly, we have revised the burden hour estimates as 
follows:
    (Fuel Rating Determination numbers are no longer applicable because 
these numbers are no longer associated with start-up costs and are 
determined during the ordinary course of business).
    Fuel Rating Certification: 1 hour x 350 industry members=350 burden 
hours.
    Labeling: 1 hour x 280 industry members=280 burden hours. (This 
calculation assumes that only 20% of 1,400 industry members will be 
affected because it is unnecessary to replace labels each year.)
    Recordkeeping associated with fuel rating determination and 
certification: 6 minutes x 1,600 industry members=160 burden hours.
    AFV labeling: producing: 2.5 hours x 5 new models per year=12.5 
burden hours; posting: 2 minutes x 20,000 new AFVs per year=667 burden 
hours. (The number of new AFVs per year was determined after 
discussions with staff at the Department of Energy.); recordkeeping: 30 
minutes x 58 industry members=29 burden hours.
    Total 1997 burden hours: approximately 1,500 (rounded).
    To re-emphasize, the FTC has not amended, nor is it in the process 
of amending, the Alternative Fuel Rule. The burden hours associated 
with the Rule have been recalculated because, as originally anticipated 
when the Rule was promulgated in 1995, many of the information 
collection requirements and the originally-estimated hours were 
associated with one-time start up tasks of implementing standards 
systems and processes. In addition, the FTC has reduced the estimated 
burden hours because the industry complies with these requirements in 
the ordinary course of business, and the definition of ``burden'' 
excludes effort that would be expended regardless of any regulatory 
requirement. 5 CFR 1320.2(b)(2). Therefore, the cost to the industry 
associated with complying with the requirements of this Rule is 
expected to be minimal.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elaine W. Crockett (202) 326-2453; FAX 
(202)-326-2447; E-mail: [email protected]
Jay C. Shaffer,
Acting General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 97-19629 Filed 7-24-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750-01-M