12788 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 45 / Tuesday, March 8, 2011 / Notices 

the air. The 2001 PEIS evaluated the 

impacts of launching 72 small capacity 

rockets, including the Pegasus launch 

vehicle family, over a 10-year period. 

The estimated annual number of 

launches ranged from four to nine 

launches, with an average of seven 

annual launches. The rate of Pegasus 

launches at CCAFS under the FAA’s 

Proposed Action would not be expected 

to exceed the rate of launches analyzed 

in the 2001 PEIS. The only alternative 

to the Proposed Action is the No Action 

Alternative. Under this Alternative, the 

FAA would not issue or renew Launch 

Operator Licenses to operate Pegasus 

launch vehicles at CCAFS. 

Resource areas were considered to 

provide a context for understanding and 

assessing the potential environmental 

effects of the Proposed Action, with 

attention focused on key issues. The 

resources areas considered in the Final 

EA included air quality; biological 

resources (including fish, wildlife, and 

plants); compatible land use; 

Department of Transportation Section 

4(f) resources; hazardous materials, 

pollution prevention, and solid waste; 

historical, architectural, archaeological, 

and cultural resources; noise; 

socioeconomic impacts; and water 

quality (including floodplains and 

wetlands). Potential cumulative impacts 

of the Proposed Action were also 

addressed in the Final EA. 

After careful and thorough 

consideration of available data and 

information on existing conditions and 

potential impacts, the FAA has 

determined that there will be no 

significant short-term, long-term, or 

cumulative impacts to the environment 

or surrounding populations from the 

issuance or renewal of Launch Operator 

Licenses to operate Pegasus launch 

vehicles at CCAFS. The proposed 

Federal action is consistent with 

existing national environmental policies 

and objectives as set forth in Section 

101 of NEPA and other applicable 

environmental requirements and will 

not significantly affect the quality of the 

human environment within the meaning 

of NEPA. Therefore, an Environmental 

Impact Statement for the Proposed 

Action is not required and the FAA 

issued a FONSI. 

The FAA has posted the Final EA and 

FONSI on the FAA Office of 

Commercial Space Transportation Web 

site at http://www.faa.gov/about/ 

office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/ 

environmental/review/launch/. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Daniel Czelusniak, Environmental 

Program Lead, Office of Commercial 

Space Transportation, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Room 325, Washington, 

DC 20591, telephone (202) 267–5924; Email daniel.czelusniak@faa.gov. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on March 1, 

2011. 

Michael McElligott, 

Manager, Space Systems Development 

Division. 

[FR Doc. 2011–5242 Filed 3–7–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Transit Administration 

[FTA Docket No. FTA–2011–0014] 

Agency Information Collection Activity 

Under OMB Review 

AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration, 

DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of request for comments. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this notice 

announces that the Information 

Collection Request (ICR) abstracted 

below is forwarded to the Office of 

Management and Budget OMB) for 

review and comments. A Federal 

Register Notice with a 60-day comment 

period soliciting comments on the 

following information collection was 

published on December 8, 2010 

(Citation 75 FR 76518). No comments 

were received from that notice. 

DATES: Comments must be submitted 

before April 7, 2011. A comment to 

OMB is most effective if OMB receives 

it within 30 days of publication. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sylvia L. Marion, Office of 

Administration, Office of Management 

Planning, (202) 366–6680. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Title: Survey of FTA Stakeholders 

(OMB Number: 2132–0564). 

Abstract: Executive Order 12862, 

‘‘Setting Customer Service Standards,’’ 

requires FTA to identify its customers 

and determine what they think about 

FTA’s service. The survey covered in 

this request will provide FTA with a 

means to gather data directly from its 

stakeholders. The information obtained 

from the survey will be used to assess 

how FTA’s services are perceived by 

stakeholders, determine opportunities 

for improvement and establish goals to 

measure results. The survey will be 

limited to data collections that solicit 

voluntary opinions and will not involve 

information that is required by 

regulations. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden: 

1,200 hours. 

ADDRESSES: All written comments must 

refer to the docket number that appears 

at the top of this document and be 

submitted to the Office of Information 

and Regulatory Affairs, Office of 

Management and Budget, 725 17th 

Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503, 

Attention: FTA Desk Officer. 

Comments are Invited on: Whether 

the proposed collection of information 

is necessary for the proper performance 

of the functions of the Department, 

including whether the information will 

have practical utility; the accuracy of 

the Department’s estimate of the burden 

of the proposed information collection; 

ways to enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and ways to minimize the 

burden of the collection of information 

on respondents, including the use of 

automated collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology. 

Issued on: March 2, 2011. 

Ann M. Linnertz, 

Associate Administrator for Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2011–5203 Filed 3–7–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–57–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Transit Administration 

Environmental Impact Statement for a 

Proposed Urban Rail system in Austin, 

TX 

AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration, 

DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of Intent to Prepare an 

Environmental Impact Statement. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Transit 

Administration (FTA), as the Federal 

lead agency, and the City of Austin (the 

City) intend to prepare an 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) 

for the proposed Urban Rail system in 

Austin, Texas. The EIS will be prepared 

in accordance with regulations 

implementing the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), as 

well as provisions of the recently 

enacted Safe, Accountable, Flexible, 

Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A 

Legacy for Users (SAFETEA–LU). The 

proposed project, described more 

completely within, is an Urban Rail 

System, similar to Streetcar, that would 

connect key activity centers within 

Central Austin—Mueller TransitOriented Redevelopment (Mueller), the 

University of Texas at Austin (UT) 

campus, the State Capitol Complex 

(Capitol), the central business district 

(CBD), and Austin-Bergstrom 

International Airport (ABIA) with each 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 45 / Tuesday, March 8, 2011 / Notices 12789 

other and to emerging regional 

transportation network nodes for 

commuter rail, regional rail, and rapid 

bus in Austin, Travis County, Texas. 

The purpose of this notice is to alert 

interested parties regarding the intent to 

prepare the EIS, to provide information 

on the nature of the proposed project 

and possible alternatives, and to invite 

public participation in the EIS process. 

DATES: Written comments on the scope 

of the EIS, including the project’s 

purpose and need, the alternatives to be 

considered, the impacts to be evaluated, 

and the methodologies to be used in the 

evaluations should be sent to Mr. Scott 

Gross, P.E., Study Manager, City of 

Austin Transportation Department on or 

before Friday, April 29, 2011. Written 

comments should be submitted at least 

two weeks after the final scoping 

meeting or at least 30 days after 

publication of the NOI, whichever date 

is later. Two public scoping meetings 

will be held by FTA during which 

questions about the project will be 

addressed and written comments will be 

accepted. The scoping meetings will be 

held on the following dates: 

• Monday, April 4, 2011; 2 p.m. to 5 

p.m.; at the Austin Convention Center 

(Meeting Room 3 on first floor), 500 E. 

Cesar Chavez Street, Austin, TX 78709, 

Telephone (512) 404–4000. 

• Wednesday, April 6, 2011; 5 p.m. to 

8 p.m.; at the Southwest Educational 

Development Laboratory (SEDL) 

(Conference Room on first floor) in the 

Mueller Redevelopment, 4700 Mueller 

Boulevard, Austin, TX 78723, 

Telephone (512) 476–6861. 

Three local agency public outreach 

meetings, at which information about 

the project will be provided, will be 

held on the following dates: 

• Thursday, April 7, 2011; 11 a.m. to 

2 p.m.; at the AT&T Executive 

Education and Conference Center 

(Classroom 103 on first floor), 1900 

University Avenue, Austin, TX 78705, 

Telephone (512) 404–1900. 

• Thursday, April 7, 2011; 5 p.m. to 

8 p.m.; at the George Washington Carver 

Museum (Museum Foyer), 1161 

Angelina Street, Austin, TX 78702, 

Telephone (512) 974–4926. 

• Saturday, April 9, 2011; 11 a.m. to 

2 p.m.; at the Ruiz Branch Library 

(Meeting Rooms), 1600 Grove 

Boulevard, Austin, TX 78741, 

Telephone (512) 974–7500. 

The buildings used for the meetings 

are accessible to persons with 

disabilities. Any individual who 

requires special assistance, such as a 

sign language interpreter, to participate 

in the meetings should contact Mario ́n 

Sa ́nchez at Estilo Communications 

(512)–477–1018 or 

marion@estilopr.com, five days prior to 

the meeting. 

Information describing the project 

purpose and need and the alternatives 

proposed for analysis will be available 

at the meetings and on the project Web 

site at http:// 

www.austinstrategicmobility.com/ 

resources/urban-rail-project. Paper 

copies of the information materials may 

also be obtained from Mr. Scott Gross, 

P.E., Study Manager, City of Austin 

Transportation Department at (512) 

974–5621 or e-mail 

scott.gross@ci.austin.tx.us. 

Representatives of Native American 

Tribal governments and of all Federal, 

State, regional and local agencies that 

may have an interest in any aspect of 

the project will be invited to be 

participating or cooperating agencies, as 

appropriate. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments on the 

scope of the EIS, including the project’s 

purpose and need, the alternatives to be 

considered, the impacts to be evaluated, 

and the methodologies to be used in the 

evaluations will be accepted at the 

public scoping meetings or they may be 

sent to: Mr. Scott Gross, P.E., Study 

Manager, City of Austin Transportation 

Department, 505 Barton Springs Road, 

Suite 800, Austin, TX 78704, e-mail 

scott.gross@ci.austin.tx.us. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Julieann Dwyer, Environmental 

Protection Specialist, Federal Transit 

Administration Region VI, 819 Taylor 

Street, Room 8A36, Fort Worth, TX 

76102, phone 817–978–0550, e-mail 

julieann.dwyer@dot.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Scoping 

FTA and the City of Austin invite all 

interested individuals and 

organizations, public agencies, and 

Native American Tribes to comment on 

the scope of the EIS for the proposed 

Urban Rail system, including the 

project’s purpose and need, the 

alternatives to be studied, the impacts to 

be evaluated, and the evaluation 

methods to be used. Comments should 

address (1) feasible alternatives that may 

better achieve the project’s purpose and 

need with fewer adverse impacts, and 

(2) any significant environmental 

impacts relating to the alternatives. 

‘‘Scoping’’ as described in the 

regulations implementing the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (Title 

40 of the Code of Federal Regulations 

(CFR) 1501.7) has specific and fairly 

limited objectives, one of which is to 

identify the significant issues associated 

with alternatives that will be examined 

in detail in the document, while 

simultaneously limiting consideration 

and development of issues that are not 

truly significant. It is in the NEPA 

scoping process that potentially 

significant environmental impacts— 

those that give rise to the need to 

prepare an environmental impact 

statement—should be identified; 

impacts that are deemed not to be 

significant need not be developed 

extensively in the context of the impact 

statement, thereby keeping the 

statement focused on impacts of 

consequence consistent with the 

ultimate objectives of the NEPA 

implementing regulations—‘‘to make the 

environmental impact statement process 

more useful to decision makers and the 

public; and to reduce paperwork and 

the accumulation of extraneous 

background data, in order to emphasize 

the need to focus on real environmental 

issues and alternatives * * * [by 

requiring] impact statements to be 

concise, clear, and to the point, and 

supported by evidence that agencies 

have made the necessary environmental 

analyses’’ (Executive Order 11991, of 

May 24, 1977). Transit projects may also 

generate environmental benefits; these 

should be highlighted as well—the 

impact statement process should draw 

attention to positive impacts, not just 

negative impacts. 

Once the scope of the environmental 

study, including significant 

environmental issues to be addressed, is 

settled, an annotated outline of the 

document will be prepared and shared 

with participating agencies and posted 

on the project Web site. The outline 

serves at least three worthy purposes, 

including (1) Documenting the results of 

the scoping process; (2) contributing to 

the transparency of the process; and (3) 

providing a clear roadmap for concise 

development of the environmental 

document. 

Purpose and Need for the Project 

The purpose of the Urban Rail system 

is to improve the mobility, connectivity, 

and sustainability of Central Austin— 

the region’s core—by providing greater 

mobility options; improving personmoving capacity; improving access and 

linkages to major activity centers and 

commuter and regional rail; supporting 

the City’s environmental, public health, 

and economic development goals; and 

encouraging investment. 

The need for the proposed Urban Rail 

system is based on the following 

considerations for Central Austin: A 

need for direct connectivity between 

Mueller Redevelopment, the University 

of Texas, the State Capitol Complex, the 

central business district, and AustinVerDate Mar<15>2010 19:12 Mar 07, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00099 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08MRN1.SGM 08MRN1

srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
12790 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 45 / Tuesday, March 8, 2011 / Notices 

Bergstrom International Airport; a need 

for a direct link between existing and 

planned passenger rail systems at 

opposite sides of downtown; a need for 

increased transportation network 

capacity in constrained rights-of-way 

through established neighborhoods; a 

need for additional alternatives to 

single-occupancy/privately owned 

vehicles; a need to attract and 

concentrate development within the 

region’s core; a need to improve air 

quality by reducing the growth of 

automobile emissions; and a need to 

support the City’s environmental, public 

health, and economic development 

goals. 

Alternatives 

The City of Austin Transportation 

Department (ATD) completed the 

Central Austin Transit Study (CATS) 

Alternatives Evaluation in July 2010, 

which evaluated potential route, 

technology, and investment alternatives. 

The CATS is posted on the project Web 

site. ATD recommended Urban Rail as 

the modal option on the alignment 

described above in July 2010, after 

evaluating three investment alternatives: 

No-Build, Better Bus (TSM), and Urban 

Rail. The Better Bus (TSM) Alternative, 

as described in detail in the CATS, was 

considered per FTA New Starts 

requirements and will not be examined 

further for NEPA purposes because it 

does not meet the purpose and need of 

the proposed action. Accordingly, the 

Urban Rail Alternative and the No-Build 

Alternative are proposed to be evaluated 

in the EIS. These two NEPA alternatives 

are described as follows: 

No-Build Alternative: The No-Build 

Alternative is defined as the existing 

transportation system, plus any 

committed transportation 

improvements. Committed 

transportation improvements include 

the highway and transit projects in 

CAMPO’s current fiscally constrained 

long-range transportation plan, CAMPO 

2035 Plan, as amended, except for the 

proposed Urban Rail system. The NoBuild Alternative serves as the NEPA 

baseline against which the 

environmental effects of other 

alternatives, including the proposed 

project, are measured. Under the NoBuild Alternative, the transit network 

within the project area is projected to be 

substantially the same as it is now, with 

bus service adjusted to meet anticipated 

demand. All elements of the No-Build 

Alternative are included in each of the 

other alternatives. 

Urban Rail Alternative: The Urban 

Rail Alternative would utilize modern 

streetcar technology on the alignment 

described above, along with all of the 

elements of the No-Build Alternative. 

Urban Rail is the City of Austin’s term 

for an overhead-electric powered 

fixed-guideway service that blends the 

operational characteristics of modern 

streetcar and light rail transit (LRT). 

Urban Rail may use shared street or 

exclusive rights-of-way with single- or 

multi-car trains, boarding passengers at 

track level or car floor level. 

Other refinements to the Urban Rail 

Alternative will be considered as part of 

the EIS alternatives’ evaluation process, 

including refinement of the proposed 

alignment, Lady Bird Lake crossing 

options, project termini, operating 

plans, stop locations, vehicle storage 

and maintenance facility location, and/ 

or design alternatives, such as medianrunning vs. curb-running location 

within the preferred alignment. While 

the environmental process will examine 

the entire 16.5 mile system, an initial 

phase or First Investment Segment (FIS), 

consisting of a minimum operating 

segment (MOS), will be identified 

within this NEPA process and may be 

constructed and operated as a starter 

system, with the remainder being 

constructed during subsequent phases. 

In addition to the alternatives 

described above, other transit 

alternatives identified through the 

public and agency scoping process will 

be evaluated for potential inclusion in 

the EIS. 

EIS Process and the Role of 

Participating Agencies and the Public 

The regulations implementing NEPA, 

as well as provisions of the Safe, 

Accountable, Flexible, Efficient 

Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for 

Users (SAFETEA–LU), call for public 

involvement in the EIS process. Section 

6002 of SAFETEA–LU (23 U.S.C. 139) 

require that FTA and the City do the 

following: (1) Extend an invitation to 

other Federal and non-Federal agencies 

and Native American Tribes that may 

have an interest in the proposed project 

to become ‘‘participating agencies;’’ (2) 

provide an opportunity for involvement 

by participating agencies and the public 

to help define the purpose and need for 

a proposed project, as well as the range 

of alternatives for consideration in the 

EIS; and (3) establish a plan for 

coordinating public and agency 

participation in, and comment on, the 

environmental review process. Any 

Federal or non-Federal agency or Native 

American Tribe interested in the 

proposed project that does not receive 

an invitation to become a participating 

agency should notify at the earliest 

opportunity the Project Manager 

identified above under ADDRESSES. 

A comprehensive public involvement 

program and a Coordination Plan for 

public and interagency involvement 

will be developed for the project and 

posted on the project’s Web site at 

http://www.austinstrategicmobility.com/ 

resources/urban-rail-project. The public 

involvement program includes a full 

range of activities including maintaining 

the project Web site and outreach to 

local officials, community and civic 

groups, and the public. Specific 

activities or events for involvement will 

be detailed in the project’s public 

participation plan. 

Paperwork Reduction 

The Paperwork Reduction Act seeks, 

in part, to minimize the cost to the 

taxpayer of the creation, collection, 

maintenance, use, dissemination, and 

disposition of information. Consistent 

with this goal and with principles of 

economy and efficiency in government, 

it is FTA policy to limit insofar as 

possible distribution of complete 

printed sets of environmental 

documents. Accordingly, unless a 

specific written request for a complete 

printed set of environmental documents 

is received by the close of the scoping 

process by the Project Manager 

identified under ADDRESSES, FTA and 

its grantees will distribute only the 

executive summary and a Compact Disc 

(CD) of the complete environmental 

document. A complete printed set of the 

environmental document will be 

available for review at the project 

sponsor’s offices and elsewhere; an 

electronic copy of the complete 

environmental document will also be 

available on the project Web site. 

Other 

The City is expecting to seek New or 

Small Starts funding for some or all 

phases of the proposed project under 49 

United States Code 5309 and will, 

therefore, be subject to New Starts 

regulations (49 Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) part 611) at some 

point in the project development 

process. The New and Small Starts 

regulations also require the submission 

of certain project justification and local 

financial commitment information to 

support a request to FTA for approval of 

entry into the Preliminary Engineering 

phase of the New Starts review process. 

Pertinent New Starts evaluation criteria 

will be included in the EIS. 

The EIS will be prepared in 

accordance with NEPA and its 

implementing regulations issued by the 

Council on Environmental Quality (40 

CFR parts 1500–1508) and with the 

FTA/Federal Highway Administration 

regulations ‘‘Environmental Impact and 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 45 / Tuesday, March 8, 2011 / Notices 12791 

Related Procedures’’ (23 CFR part 771). 

Related environmental procedures to be 

addressed during the NEPA process 

include, but are not limited to, 

Executive Order 12898 on 

Environmental Justice; Section 106 of 

the National Historic Preservation Act; 

and Section 4(f) of the DOT Act (49 

U.S.C. 303). 

Issued on: March 2, 2011. 

Blas M. Uribe, 

Deputy Regional Administrator, Federal 

Transit Administration Region VI, Fort Worth, 

Texas. 

[FR Doc. 2011–5201 Filed 3–7–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–57–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

Information Collection Activities: 

Submission for the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) 

Review; Request for Comment 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of the OMB review of 

information collection and solicitation 

of public comment. 

SUMMARY: In compliance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this notice 

announces that the Information 

Collection Request (ICR) abstracted 

below will be submitted to the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) for 

review. The ICR describes the nature of 

the information collection and its 

expected burden. A Federal Register 

Notice with a 60-day comment period 

soliciting public comment on the 

following information collection was 

published on December 9, 2010 (75 FR 

76781–76783). 

DATES: Submit comments to the Office 

of Management and Budget (OMB) on or 

before April 7, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments to the 

Office of Information and Regulatory 

Affairs, Office of Management and 

Budget, 725 17th Street, NW., 

Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk 

Officer for Department of 

Transportation, National Highway 

Traffic Safety Administration. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Alan Block at the National Highway 

Traffic Safety Administration, Office of 

Behavioral Safety Research (NTI–131), 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. Mr. Block’s 

phone number is 202–366–6401 and his 

e-mail address is alan.block@dot.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Title: Evaluation Surveys for Impaired 

Driving and Seat Belt Interventions. 

OMB Number: 2127–0646. 

Type of Request: Revision. 

Abstract: Telephone surveys have 

been an important component in 

NHTSA’s evaluation of seat belt and 

alcohol-impaired driving intervention 

activity. They have been used to 

measure public awareness of 

intervention campaigns, penetration of 

campaign messages, and perceived risk 

of negative consequences from engaging 

in proscribed behavior. The surveys 

have typically followed a pre-post 

design, where differences between an 

initial baseline survey wave and a later 

survey wave were associated with an 

intervening intervention. NHTSA has 

found such surveys to be valuable in 

assessing the multi-million dollar 

national media campaigns conducted 

for the National Impaired Driving 

Crackdowns and the National Click It or 

Ticket Mobilizations. They also have 

been useful in evaluating localized 

programs that tested variants of 

intervention models by providing 

information to assess campaign 

communications or interpret collected 

behavioral measures. With seat belt and 

alcohol-impaired driving intervention 

activity anticipated to remain heavy for 

the foreseeable future, there is a need for 

NHTSA to continue to apply these data 

collection techniques to see if the 

campaigns are achieving their 

objectives. 

NHTSA is proposing to continue 

conducting national telephone surveys 

surrounding the National Impaired 

Driving Crackdowns and National Click 

It or Ticket Mobilizations. In conducting 

one or more of the National surveys, 

NHTSA may have a need to collect 

information to assess localized activity 

associated with the National Crackdown 

or Mobilization. This would involve 

augmentation of the pre- and post 

national sample with one or more 

Regional, State, or Community samples. 

In addition to the telephone surveys 

associated with the National Impaired 

Driving Crackdown and National Click 

It or Ticket Mobilization, NHTSA 

intends to conduct telephone surveys to 

assess selected demonstrations of 

interventions designed to reduce 

alcohol-impaired driving and/or 

increase seat belt use. The surveys will 

also follow a pre-post design. 

Interventions sustained over an 

extended period of time may add one or 

more interim survey waves. 

NHTSA currently has an approved 

inventory of 164,800 10-minute 

interviews under OMB Number 2127– 

0646 for surveys to help assess the 

National Impaired Driving Crackdowns, 

the National Click It or Ticket 

Mobilizations, and certain localized seat 

belt or alcohol-impaired driving 

demonstration projects. To date, 

approximately 59,000 interviews have 

either been completed or are scheduled 

to be completed prior to an OMB 

decision regarding this requested 

revision. The requested revision is to 

decrease the inventory to 160,211 while 

renewing the clearance for three more 

years. 

Affected Public: Randomly selected 

members of the general public eighteen 

and older in telephone households. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden: 

5,600 hours per year (33,600 10-minute 

interviews) divided as follows: 2,000 

hours (12,000 interviews) for national 

surveys associated with the National 

Impaired Driving Crackdowns or 

National Click It or Ticket 

Mobilizations, 1,333 hours (8,000 

interviews) for localized surveys 

associated with the National 

Crackdowns or Mobilizations, and 2,267 

hours (13,600 interviews) for other 

selected seat belt or alcohol-impaired 

driving demonstrations. Over a three 

year period this would be 16,800 hours 

for 100,800 interviews. 

Comments are invited on: Whether 

the proposed collection of information 

is necessary for the proper performance 

of the functions of the Department of 

Transportation, including whether the 

information will have practical utility; 

the accuracy of the Department’s 

estimate of the burden of the proposed 

information collection; ways to enhance 

the quality, utility and clarity of the 

information to be collected; and ways to 

minimize the burden of the collection of 

information on respondents, including 

the use of automated collection 

techniques or other forms of information 

technology. A comment to OMB is most 

effective if OMB receives it within 30 

days of publication. 

Authority: 44 U.S.C. Section 3506(c)(2)(A). 

Jeffrey Michael, 

Associate Administrator, Research and 

Program Development. 

[FR Doc. 2011–5216 Filed 3–7–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES