[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 159 (Wednesday, August 16, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49987-49989]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-20779]


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

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION


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

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The information collection requirements described below will 
be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review, 
as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). The Federal Trade 
Commission (FTC) is soliciting public comments on the proposal to 
extend through November 30, 2003 the current PRA clearance for 
information collection requirements contained in its Alternative Fuel 
Rule. That clearance expires on November 30, 2000.

DATES: Comments must be filed by October 16, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to Secretary, Federal Trade Commission, Room 
H-159, 600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20580. All comments 
should be captioned ``Alternative Fuel Rule: Paperwork comment.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information 
should be addressed to Neil Blickman, Division of Enforcement, Bureau 
of Consumer Protection, Federal Trade Commission, Room S-4302, 601 
Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Washington, DC 20580.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the PRA of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), 
Federal agencies must obtain approval from OMB for each collection of 
information they conduct or sponsor. ``Collection of information'' 
means agency request or requirements that members of the public submit 
reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. 44 
U.S.C. 3502(3), 5 CFR 1320.3(c). As required by section 3506(c)(2)(A) 
of the PRA, the FTC is providing this opportunity for public

[[Page 49988]]

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 functions of 
the agency, including whether the information will have practical 
utility; (2) 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; (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 those who 
are to respond, including through 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.
    The Alternative Fuel Rule, 16 CFR Part 309 (Control Number: 3084-
0094), issued under the Energy Policy Act of 1992, Pub. L. 102-486, 
requires disclosure of specific information on labels posted on fuel 
dispensers for non-liquid alternative fuels and on labels on 
alternative fueled vehicles (AFVs). To ensure the accuracy of these 
disclosures, the Rule also requires that sellers maintain records 
substantiating product-specific disclosures they include on these 
labels.

Burden Statement

    It is common practice for alternative fuel 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 to decide how to market them. ``Burden'' for PRA purposes 
is defined to exclude effort that would be expended regardless of any 
regulatory requirement. 5 CFR 1320.2(b)(2). Moreover, 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 standard 
systems and processes.
     Other factors also limit the burden associated with the Rule. 
Certification may be a one-time event or require only infrequent 
revision. Disclosures on electric vehicle fuel dispensing systems may 
be useable for several years. (Label specifications were designed to 
produce labels to withstand the elements for several years.) 
Nonetheless, there is still some burden associated with posting labels. 
There also will be some minimal burden associated with new or revised 
certification of fuel ratings and recordkeeping. The burden on vehicle 
manufacturers is limited because only newly-manufactured vehicles will 
require label posting and manufacturers produce very few new models 
each year. Finally, there will be some burden, also minor, associated 
with recordkeeping requirements.
    Estimated total annual hours burden: 1,500 total burden hours, 
rounded.
    Non-liquid alternative fuels: Recordkeeping: Staff estimates that 
all 1,600 industry members will be subject to the Rule's recordkeeping 
requirements (associated with fuel rating certification) and that 
compliance will require approximately one-tenth hour each per year for 
a total of 160 hours.
    Certification: Staff estimates that the Rule's fuel rating 
certification requirements will affect approximately 350 industry 
members (compressed natural gas producers and distributors and 
manufacturers of electric vehicle fuel dispensing systems) and consume 
approximately one hour each per year for a total of 350 hours.
    Labeling: Staff estimates that labeling requirements will affect 
approximately nine of every ten industry members (or roughly 1,400 
members), but that the number of annually affected members is only 280 
because labels may remain effective for several years (staff assumes 
that in any given year approximately 20% of 1,400 industry members will 
need to replace their labels). Staff estimates that industry members 
require approximately one hour each per year for labeling their fuel 
dispensers for a total of 280 hours.

Sub-total: 790 hours (160 + 350 + 280)

    AFV manufacturers: Recordkeeping: Staff estimates that all 58 
manufacturers will require 30 minutes to comply with the Rule's 
recordkeeping requirements for a total of 29 hours.
    Producing labels: Staff estimates 2.5 hours as the average time 
required of manufacturers to produce labels for each of the five new 
AFV models introduced among them each year for a total of 12.5 hours.
    Posting labels: Staff estimates 2 minutes as the average time to 
comply with the posting requirements for each of the approximately 
20,000 new AFVs manufactured each year for a total of 667 hours.

Sub-total: approximately 708 hours (29 + 12.5 + 667)

    Thus, total burden for these industries combined is approximately 
1,500 hours (790 + 708).

Estimated labor costs: $27,000, rounded.

    Labor costs are derived by applying appropriate hourly cost figures 
to the burden hours described above. According to Bureau of Labor 
Statistics staff, the average compensation for producers and 
distributors in the fuel industry is $19.42 per hour and $8.42 per hour 
for service station employees; the average compensation for workers in 
the vehicle industry is $19.14 per hour.
    Non-liquid alternative fuels: Certification and labeling: 
Generally, all of the estimated hours except for recordkeeping will be 
performed by producers and distributors of fuels. Thus, the associated 
labor costs would be $12,234.60 (630 hours  x  $19.14).
    Recordkeeping: only \1/6\ of the total 160 hours will be performed 
by the producers and distributors of fuels; the other \5/6\ is 
attributable to service station employees (\1/6\ = 27 hours  x  $19.42 
= $524.34 + (\5/6\ = 133 hours  x  $8.42 = $1,119.86) = $1,644.20, for 
an estimated labor cost to the entire industry of $13,878.80.
    AFV manufacturers: The maximum labor cost to the entire industry is 
approximately $13,551.12 per year for recordkeeping and producing and 
posting labels (708 total hours  x  $19.14/hour).
    Thus, estimated total labor cost for both industries for all 
paperwork requirements is $27,000 ($13,878.80 + $13,551.12) per year, 
rounded to the nearest thousand.

Estimated annual non-labor cost burden: $8,000, rounded.

    Non-liquid alternative fuels: Staff believes that there are no 
current start-up costs associated with the Rule, inasmuch as the Rule 
has been effective since 1995. Industry members, therefore, have in 
place the capital equipment and means necessary, especially to 
determine automotive fuel ratings and comply with the Rule. Industry 
members, however, incur the cost of procuring fuel dispenser and AFV 
labels to comply with the Rule. The estimated annual fuel labeling 
cost, based on estimates of 360 fuel dispensers (assumptions: An 
estimated 20% of 900 total retailers need to replace labels in any 
given year given an approximate five-year life for labels--i.e., 180 
retailers--multiplied by an average of two dispensers per retailer) at 
thirty-eight cents for each label (per industry sources), is $136.80.
    AFV manufacturers: Here, too, staff believes that there are no 
current start-up costs associated with the Rule, for the same reasons 
as stated immediately above regarding the non-liquid alternative fuel 
industry. However,

[[Page 49989]]

based on the labeling of an estimated 20,000 new and used AFVs each 
year at thirty-eight cents for each label (per industry sources), the 
annual AFV labeling cost is estimated to be $7,600. Estimated total 
annual non-labor cost burden associated with the Rule, therefore, would 
be $8,000 ($136.80 + $7,600.00), rounded to the nearest thousand.

Debra A. Valentine,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 00-20779 Filed 8-15-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750-01-M