Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 64 / Friday, April 3, 2015 / Notices 18295 

sidewalls, the vehicle’s Owner’s Manual 

which contains information pertaining 

to the various tire sizes and tire pressure 

for use on the affected vehicles, and 

BMW’s Roadside AssistanceTM program 

which is available 24 hours/day and 

provides representatives who have 

information on all available tire sizes 

and specifications for a given model and 

model year of BMW. BMW states its 

belief that all of the above listed sources 

would lead the driver to obtaining the 

correct recommended cold inflation 

pressure when attempting to inflate the 

tires mounted on their vehicle. 

For the subject vehicles containing 

both incorrect 49 CFR part 567 

certification labels and incorrect FMVSS 

No. 110 tire information labels BMW 

states that the driver can use the 

labeling on the sidewall of the installed 

tires, the vehicle’s owner’s manual, and 

BMW Roadside AssistanceTM to 

determine the recommended cold 

inflation pressure for the tires installed 

on their vehicle. 

BMW also maintains that if a driver 

were to use the cold inflation pressure 

shown on the incorrect labels for the for 

18-inch tires when inflating the 19-inch 

tires, that pressure would be sufficient 

to support vehicle loading. Their 

calculations using the MY 2015 X5 

xDrive35i for example show that the 

determined load rating for two 19-inch 

tires inflated to the pressure meant for 

18-inch tires is 1,572 kg. Because the 

front gross axle weight rating (GAWR) is 

1,279 kg, BMW concludes that the 19- 

inch tires would be adequately inflated. 

BMW also included calculations to 

demonstrate that the information on the 

certification labels is correct for the 18- 

inch tires mounted on the subject 

vehicles. 

BMW states that BMW Customer 

Relations have not received any contact 

from vehicle owners regarding this issue 

and, therefore, are unaware that any 

vehicle owner has encountered this 

issue in the field. They state that they 

are also unaware of any accident or 

injuries that have occurred as a result of 

this noncompliance. 

BMW has additionally informed 

NHTSA that it has corrected the subject 

noncompliance. 

In summation, BMW believes that the 

described noncompliance of the subject 

vehicles is inconsequential to motor 

vehicle safety, and that its petition, to 

exempt BMW from providing recall 

notification of noncompliance as 

required by 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 

remedying the recall noncompliance as 

required by 49 U.S.C. 30120 should be 

granted. 

NHTSA notes that the statutory 

provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 

30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to 

file petitions for a determination of 

inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to 

exempt manufacturers only from the 

duties found in sections 30118 and 

30120, respectively, to notify owners, 

purchasers, and dealers of a defect or 

noncompliance and to remedy the 

defect or noncompliance. Therefore, any 

decision on this petition only applies to 

the subject vehicles that BMW no longer 

controlled at the time it determined that 

the noncompliance existed. However, 

any decision on this petition does not 

relieve vehicle distributors and dealers 

of the prohibitions on the sale, offer for 

sale, or introduction or delivery for 

introduction into interstate commerce of 

the noncompliant vehicles under their 

control after BMW notified them that 

the subject noncompliance existed. 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: 

delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.95 and 

501.8. 

Jeffrey M. Giuseppe, 

Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. 

[FR Doc. 2015–07608 Filed 4–2–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. FMCSA–2014–0377] 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; New Information Collection 

Request: Electronic Logging Device 

(ELD) Registration 

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration (FMCSA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice and request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 

FMCSA announces its plan to submit 

the Information Collection Request (ICR) 

described below to the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) for its 

review and approval and invites public 

comment on the approval of a new (ICR) 

entitled, Electronic Logging Device 

Registration. This ICR will be used to 

enable providers to register their ELDs 

with FMCSA. 

DATES: Please send your comments by 

May 4, 2015. OMB must receive your 

comments by this date in order to act on 

the ICR. 

ADDRESSES: All comments should 

reference Federal Docket Management 

System (FDMS) Docket Number 

FMCSA–2014–0377. Interested persons 

are invited to submit written comments 

on the proposed information collection 

to the Office of Information and 

Regulatory Affairs, Office of 

Management and Budget. Comments 

should be addressed to the attention of 

the Desk Officer, Department of 

Transportation/Federal Motor Carrier 

Safety Administration, and sent via 

electronic mail to oira_submission@

omb.eop.gov, or faxed to (202) 395– 

6974, or mailed to the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

Office of Management and Budget, 

Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th 

Street NW., Washington, DC 20503. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Brian Routhier, Transportation 

Specialist, Technology Division, Office 

of Analysis, Research and Technology, 

Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration, Department of 

Transportation, West Building 6th 

Floor, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. Telephone: 

202–366–1225; email brian.routhier@

dot.gov. Office hours are from 9:00 a.m. 

to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Title: Electronic Logging Device (ELD) 

Registration. 

OMB Control Number: 2126–00XX. 

Type of Request: New Collection. 

Respondents: ELD providers. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

22. FMCSA estimates that there will be 

22 respondents, 20 U.S. and 2 foreign 

ELD providers, and that each provider 

will register an average of 4 devices. The 

total of 88 devices (4 devices × 22 

providers) exceeds the number of 

devices that FMCSA is currently aware 

of, but the Agency has opted to use a 

conservatively high count in order to 

avoid under-estimating the burden for 

this ICR. 

Estimated Time per Response: 15 

minutes first year and 7.5 minutes in 

subsequent years. Each provider will 

take an estimated 15 minutes of 

preparation time plus 15 minutes per 

device to complete the initial 

registration, for a total of 75 minutes per 

provider in the first year (15 minutes of 

preparation time + (4 devices per 

provider × 15 minutes per device) = 75 

minutes). In subsequent years, it is 

estimated that registration updates will 

take half the initial time, for a total of 

37.5 minutes per provider (7.5 minutes 

of preparation time + (4 devices per 

provider x 7.5 minutes per device) = 

37.5 minutes). 

Expiration Date: N/A. This is a new 

ICR. 

Frequency of Response: On occasion. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden: 18 

hours [((22 respondents × 75 minutes in 

year 1) + (22 respondents × 37.5 minutes 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
18296 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 64 / Friday, April 3, 2015 / Notices 

in year 2) + (22 respondents × 37.5 

minutes in year 3)) = 3,300 minutes ÷ 60 

minutes per hour = 55 ÷ 3 year approval 

period = 18.33 hours, rounded to 18 

hours]. 

Background 

On March 28, 2014, FMCSA 

published a supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking (SNPRM) entitled, 

‘‘Electronic Logging Devices and Hours 

of Service Supporting Documents,’’ (79 

FR 17656). Specifically, the SNPRM 

proposed: (1) New technical 

specifications for ELDs that address 

statutory requirements; and (2) to 

require the use of ELDs by those within 

the motor carrier industry who are 

currently subject to Records of Duty 

Status (RODS) preparation 

requirements. To ensure consistency 

among manufacturers and devices, 

functional specifications were 

published with the SNPRM. The 

SNPRM would require providers to 

certify their compliance with these 

functional specifications. Providers 

would also be required to register their 

compliant devices with FMCSA. 

The ELD providers will be asked to 

certify and register their devices with 

FMCSA online via an application Form 

MCSA–5893, ‘‘Electronic Logging 

Device (ELD) Registration and 

Certification.’’ FMCSA expects 100 

percent of respondents to submit their 

information electronically. Once the 

registration is completed, FMCSA will 

issue the provider a unique 

identification number that the provider 

will embed in its device(s). 

The FMCSA will maintain a list on its 

Web site of the current ELD providers 

and devices that have been certified (by 

the providers) to meet the technical 

specifications. The information will be 

necessary for fleets and drivers to easily 

find a compliant ELD to use in meeting 

the FMCSA regulation requiring the use 

of ELDs. 

Comments From the Public 

General Summary 

FMCSA published a notice in the 

Federal Register with a 60-day public 

comment period to announce this 

proposed ICR on October 28, 2014 (79 

FR 64248). The Agency requested 

comments concerning the necessity of 

the proposed information collection, the 

accuracy of the estimated burden, how 

the quality of collected information 

could be enhanced and ways in which 

the burden could be minimized without 

reducing the quality of the collected 

information. The Agency received 19 

comments. Of these comments, nine 

were outside the scope of this notice. 

Some of these comments actually 

responded to elements of the ELD 

SNPRM, rather than the registration 

process. 

Guidance on Registration Process 

Several commenters stated that there 

was a need for additional guidance for 

ELD registration. Garmin also wanted 

guidance on registration when an ELD 

sub-function may be implemented 

across multiple software and hardware 

components provided by one or more 

providers. 

Two commenters asked who is 

responsible for registration and 

supplying the certification of conformity 

to the ELD functional requirements. 

Verigo suggested that FMCSA clarify 

what supporting documentation would 

be necessary to complete the software 

certification. One commenter wrote that, 

according to the SNPRM, only device 

manufacturers can register. 

FMCSA Response 

Registration of ELDs is the 

responsibility of the ELD provider. An 

ELD provider is the entity who 

manufactures the ELD, manufactures or 

assembles the ELD technology, certifies 

that the ELD complies with the 

functional specifications for ELDs set 

forth in the proposed subpart B of part 

395 (including the proposed Appendix 

to subpart B of Part 395), and registers 

it on the FMCSA Web site. 

Definition of Device and Other Systems 

With ELD Functionality 

A commenter wanted clarification of 

what FMCSA means by device. A 

commenter suggested that FMCSA allow 

the certification and registration of 

individual devices or subsystems (e.g., 

Bluetooth device, mobile smartphone or 

tablet, etc.) as meeting a subset of the 

technical specifications. These 

components could be combined into 

compliant ELD systems. 

A commenter asked how a softwarebased Transportation Management 

System would be registered. 

FMCSA Response 

Electronic Logging Device (ELD) 

means a device or technology that meets 

the requirements of proposed subpart B 

of part 395 including the proposed 

Appendix to subpart B of part 395— 

Functional Specifications for All 

Electronic Logging Devices (ELDs). In 

proposed § 395.2 it is defined as a 

device or technology that automatically 

records a driver’s driving time and 

facilitates the accurate recording of the 

driver’s hours of service, and that meets 

the requirements of subpart B of this 

part. Where the combination of subcomponents is needed to meet this 

definition, the provider must register all 

of the components together as the ELD 

device. 

Software Version Control 

Commenters asked how software 

version updates would be 

accommodated. Vnomics recommended 

that the software version that is 

displayed be the current base or main 

version. Vnomics also asked FMCSA to 

verify that the software version required 

by proposed section 5.2.1(3) refers to the 

ELD software version that is part of a 

larger telematics solution. 

FMCSA Response 

The ELD registration process will 

allow providers to update and maintain 

their device information to 

accommodate software version 

revisions. Providers will be able to 

update device information and software 

revisions on the registration site when 

they deem it necessary to do so, and 

will continue to certify that the updated 

device(s) continue to meet the 

regulation’s requirements. See SNPRM 

Section 5.1.2: 

5.1.2. Keeping Information Current 

The ELD provider must keep the 

information in section 5.1.1 (b) and 

5.2.1 current through FMCSA’s Web 

site. 

Time To Register/Registration 

Information 

Saucon reminded the Agency that the 

content of the form would affect the 

estimates of the time registration would 

take annually. Saucon could not concur 

with the time estimate to complete the 

registration process. The commenter 

wrote that the time estimate depends on 

several undefined factors, including the 

level of detail in Form MCSA–5893. 

Saucon suggested that a simple 

checklist of key technical points that 

must be met by the provider might be 

sufficient for the form. Saucon also 

asked FMCSA to clarify that 

certification is required at the product 

level, and not the individual device 

level. 

Until all the technical specification 

issues in the SNPRM have been resolved 

and Form MCSA–5893 has been created 

to require the provision of substantive 

information demonstrating compliance, 

OOIDA believed that the ICR proceeding 

is premature. OOIDA believed the 

certification, with such specific 

information, should be updated as the 

rule evolves, otherwise a provider could 

remain on the approved list without 

additional verification of continued 

compliance. 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 64 / Friday, April 3, 2015 / Notices 18297 

A commenter asked how devices can 

be registered as compliant before the 

details of compliancy are published. 

Saucon noted that the form was not 

available for comment. 

While the registration process itself 

did not impose an undue burden, Verigo 

was concerned that there was no 

estimate of the time required to 

complete the software certification or 

what would be required to be submitted 

to substantiate that certification. Verigo 

commented that the certification 

process is a significant undertaking and 

volunteered to provide its estimate to 

FMCSA. 

FMCSA Response 

As proposed in the SNPRM, the 

registration of ELDs requires 15 pieces 

of information from the providers 

outlined in section 5.1.1, Registering 

Online, and section 5.1.2, Online 

Certification. FMCSA conducted time 

trials to determine the average amount 

of time required to complete a simulated 

form with the 15 items required to 

register an ELD. 

5.1.1 Registering Online 

(a) An ELD provider developing an 

ELD technology must register online at 

a secure FMCSA Web site where the 

ELD provider can securely certify that 

its ELD is compliant with this appendix. 

(b) Provider’s registration must 

include the following information: 

(1) Company name of the technology 

provider/manufacturer. 

(2) Name of an individual authorized 

by the provider to verify that the ELD 

is compliant with this appendix and to 

certify it under section 5.2 of this 

appendix. 

(3) Address of the registrant. 

(4) Email address of the registrant. 

(5) Telephone number of the 

registrant. 

5.2.1. Online Certification 

(a) An ELD provider registered online 

as described in section 5.1.1 must 

disclose the information in paragraph 

(b) of this section about each ELD model 

and version and certify that the 

particular ELD is compliant with the 

requirements of this appendix. 

(b) The online process will only allow 

a provider to complete certification if 

the provider successfully discloses all of 

the following required information: 

(1) Name of the product. 

(2) Model number of the product. 

(3) Software version of the product. 

(4) An ELD identifier, uniquely 

identifying the certified model and 

version of the ELD, assigned by the ELD 

provider in accordance with 7.1.15. 

(5) Picture and/or screen shot of the 

product. 

(6) User’s manual describing how to 

operate the ELD. 

(7) Description of the supported and 

certified data transfer mechanisms and 

step-by-step instructions for a driver to 

produce and transfer the ELD records to 

an authorized safety official. 

(8) Summary description of ELD 

malfunctions. 

(9) Procedure to validate an ELD 

authentication value as described in 

section 7.1.14. 

(10) Certifying statement describing 

how the product was tested to comply 

with FMCSA regulations. 

Registration will be at the model level 

of the ELD, not at the individual device 

level. See 5.2.1(b)(2) above. 

FMCSA will include procedures for 

provider registration of an ELD on the 

registration Web site. FMCSA will also 

provide guidance on the Web site to the 

provider that will contain the tools the 

provider will need to ensure that its 

ELD meets the technical specifications 

in part 395. This guidance will contain 

all requirements and procedures related 

to RODS data compliance. However, it 

will be the responsibility of each 

provider to ensure that its products 

comply with the RODS file data 

definitions that FMCSA provides. If the 

regulation evolves, the changes to the 

technical specification and the 

certification process will be updated 

through the notice and comment 

process. 

In response to Verigo comments 

regarding the time necessary to 

determine whether the software meets 

the certification requirements, we note 

that the certification process is outside 

the scope of the current ICR, which is 

limited to the time required to fill out 

the certification information in 5.1.1 

and 5.2.1 of the Appendix to 395. 

ID/Authentication 

Under proposed section 5.1.3, FMCSA 

will provide a unique ELD registration 

ID number that the provider will embed 

on the device. Saucon asked FMCSA to 

provide an example of the ID number, 

and to clarify its purpose, including 

when the ID number needs to be 

provided and displayed. It asked if the 

ID number could be used as evidence 

during inspections that a device is ELDcertified and if Saucon would receive a 

certificate that it could present at 

inspections. 

FMCSA Response 

The unique ELD registration ID format 

is outside the scope of this ICR. But, in 

section 7.17 of the Appendix to Subpart 

B of Part 395—Functional Specifications 

for All Electronic Logging Devices 

(ELDs), FMCSA defined the ELD 

Registration ID and proposed that the 

registration ID be available on the ELD 

during inspections. The Agency does 

not plan to issue certificates for certified 

ELDs. 

Updating Existing Devices 

Saucon asked how that ID number 

could be added to register existing, 

already installed AOBRDs that, through 

software updates, may become 

compliant ELDs. These AOBRDs are not 

easily accessible to either the 

manufacturer or the motor carrier. 

FMCSA Response 

Software updates, although outside 

the scope of this ICR, would most likely 

be provided through the connectivity of 

AOBRDs via their cellular connection or 

available online to AOBRD owners. 

These software updates can include the 

Registration ID for the newly compliant 

devices. Existing device providers will 

be able to notify owners of existing 

AOBRDs if their devices are capable of 

being updated to meet ELD requirement 

through software updates. These devices 

in turn will be able to be registered and 

certified by the providers on the FMCSA 

ELD registration Web site. 

FMCSA Certified ELD List 

Saucon provided a list of information 

that it suggested be included on any 

Web site storing information on ELDcertified providers. The list included the 

company name and contact information, 

a link to the provider’s Web site, a 

descriptor noting in which industry the 

provider mainly works (i.e., 

motorcoach, trucking, etc.), and a 

section for comments on what the 

provider provides. Saucon also 

suggested that the provider have a 

username and password to access and 

edit the information on the Web site. 

During roadside inspections and 

Safety Audits and Compliance Reviews, 

CVSA wrote that it would be critical for 

inspectors to accurately and quickly 

verify compliance. Therefore, the 

Agency must consider what 

documentation needs to be maintained 

as evidence of certification. 

FMCSA Response 

The FMCSA list of registered devices 

will include only the minimal 

information on the certified devices. 

The Agency outlined this in the SNPRM 

in Section 5.3: 

5.3. Publicly Available Information 

Except for the information listed 

under section 5.1.1 (b)(2), (4), and (5) 

and section 5.2.1 (b)(9), FMCSA will 

make the information in sections 5.1.1 

and 5.2.1 for each certified ELD publicly 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
18298 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 64 / Friday, April 3, 2015 / Notices 

available on a Web site to allow motor 

carriers to determine which products 

have been properly registered and 

certified as ELDs compliant with this 

appendix. 

FMCSA will not provide or require 

‘‘certification documents’’ that would be 

carried with the device. The ELD 

Registration ID will be verified through 

eRODS only. 

De-Registration 

Verigo was concerned with the ELD 

de-registration process and requested 

more information. 

FMCSA Response 

FMCSA will provide information 

regarding the de-registration process in 

the Final Rule. 

Self-Certification 

OOIDA commented that the 

information required of ELD 

manufacturers who wish to be on 

FMCSA’s approved list of providers 

must be more substantive than a general 

self-certification of compliance with the 

technical specifications of the rule. 

FMCSA Response 

The registration of ELDs requires 15 

pieces of information from the 

providers, as outlined in proposed 

section 5, ELD Registration and 

Certification, Section 5.1.1, Registering 

Online, and section 5.1.2, Online 

Certification. Specifically, proposed 

section 5.2.1(b)(10) would require a 

‘‘Certifying statement describing how 

the product was tested to comply with 

FMCSA regulations.’’ The Agency 

requires this self-certification just as 

NHTSA requires self-certification of 

vehicle and parts manufacturers. 

Public Comments Invited: You are 

asked to comment on any of the 

following aspects of this information 

collection: (1) Whether the proposed 

collection is necessary for the FMCSA to 

perform its functions; (2) the accuracy of 

the estimated burden; (3) ways for the 

FMCSA to enhance the quality, 

usefulness, and clarity of the collected 

information; and (4) ways that the 

burden could be minimized without 

reducing the quality of the collected 

information. 

Issued under the authority of 49 CFR 1.87 

on: March 26, 2015. 

G. Kelly Regal, 

Associate Administrator, Office of Research 

and Information Technology and Chief 

Information Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2015–07669 Filed 4–2–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES