Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 111 / Friday, June 8, 2001 / Notices 30979

ADDRESSES: Send comments to the

Office of Information and Regulatory

Affairs, Office of Management and

Budget, 725 Seventeenth Street NW.,

Washington, DC 20503, Attention: DOT

Desk Officer. We particularly request

your comments on whether the

collection of information is necessary

for the FMCSA to meet its goal of

reducing truck crashes, including

whether the information is useful to this

goal; the accuracy of the estimate of the

burden of the information collection;

ways to enhance the quality, utility and

clarity of the information 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.

OMB wants to receive comments within

30 days of publication of this notice in

order to act on the ICR quickly.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Title: Transportation of Hazardous

Materials; Highway Routing.

OMB Approval Number: 2126–0014.

Background: The data for the

Transportation of Hazardous Materials;

Highway Routing designations are

collected under authority of 49 U.S.C.

5112 and 5125. That authority places

responsibility on the Secretary of

Transportation to specify and regulate

standards for establishing, maintaining,

and enforcing routing designations.

Under 49 CFR 397.73, the Administrator

has the authority to request that each

state and Indian tribe, through its

routing agency, provide information

identifying hazardous materials (HM)

routing designations within their

respective jurisdictions. That

information will be consolidated by the

FMCSA and published annually in

whole or as updates in the Federal

Register.

The FMCSA published the required

notice offering a 60-day comment period

on the ICR on March 6, 2001 (66 FR

13620). We received two comments. The

first commenter, the Institute of Makers

of Explosives (IME), did not dispute the

need for FMCSA to collect information

they characterized as ‘‘essential.’’ It did,

however, point out there have been

errors in past publications of the

information and made suggestions for

improving the quality of the information

and its presentation to the public. IME

suggested that FMCSA should request

each state to review, revise, and resubmit information. IME also requested

that FMCSA be open to suggestions

about other delivery mechanisms to

make this information available and

suggested FMCSA use the mechanism of

the ‘‘Uniform Program.’’ IME also

requested that FMCSA update the HM

routing website as changes occur.

FMCSA does periodically request that

each state review, revise, and re-submit

information in preparation for

publication of routes in the Federal

Register. We also ask states to inform us

when routing changes are made.

FMCSA updates the HM routing website

as we become aware of problems. For

example, the Maryland I–95 error

mentioned in IME’s letter was corrected

after FMCSA was made aware of the

problem. FMCSA accepts suggestions

about other delivery mechanisms to

make this information available and will

consider using the ‘‘Uniform Program,’’

although it is not clear how that specific

mechanism would work. FMCSA invites

IME to submit further elaboration of

how FMCSA could use the ‘‘Uniform

Program’’ to deliver information about

HM routes.

The second commenter, the American

Trucking Associations (ATA), made

comments similar to those submitted by

IME. ATA stated that the information

being collected is essential and pointed

out that publication of the information

in the past has contained errors. In

addition, ATA recommended that, to

remedy past problems, the

responsibility for the HM Routing

program should be transferred to the

Research and Special Programs

Administration.

FMCSA recognizes that there have

been errors in the routing program in

the past and that notices have not been

published annually in the Federal

Register, as required by 49 CFR part

397. However, FMCSA is a new

organization and has published a

Federal Register notice every year we

have been in existence. FMCSA also

continually updates the list of routes by

way of an Internet website, http://

hazmat.fmcsa.dot.gov, and corrects

errors as we are made aware of them.

Because we have already addressed

ATA’s concerns, we believe transfer of

the program to the Research and Special

Programs Administration is not

necessary.

Respondents: The reporting burden is

shared by the 50 States, the District of

Columbia, Puerto Rico, American

Samoa, Guam, Northern Marianas, and

the Virgin Islands; as applicable.

Estimated Total Annual Burden: The

annual reporting burden is estimated to

be 13 hours, calculated as follows: (53

respondents × 1 response × 15 minutes/

60 minutes = 13.25 hours, rounded to 13

hours).

Frequency: There is one response

annually from approximately 53

respondents.

Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act

of 1995, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended;

and 49 CFR 1.73.

Issued on: June 1, 2001.

Stephen E. Barber,

Acting Deputy Administrator.

[FR Doc. 01–14523 Filed 6–7–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

Discretionary Cooperative Agreements

To Assist in the Development of Crash

Outcome Data Evaluation System

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of availability—

discretionary cooperative agreements to

assist in the development and use of

Crash Outcome Data Evaluation System.

SUMMARY: The National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration (NHTSA)

announces a discretionary cooperative

agreement program to assist states in the

development and use of Crash Outcome

Data Evaluation System (CODES) and

solicits applications for projects under

this program from states that have not

previously been funded to develop

CODES. Under this program, states will

link their existing statewide traffic

records with medical outcome and

charge data. The linked data will be

used to support highway safety

decision-making at the local, regional,

and state levels to reduce deaths, nonfatal injuries, and health care costs

resulting from motor vehicle crashes.

DATES: Applications must be received at

the office designated below by 3:00 PM

on or before August 7, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Applications must be

submitted to DOT/National Highway

Traffic Safety Administration, Office of

Contracts and Procurement (NAD–30),

ATTN: Mr. Joe Comella, 400 7th Street

SW., Room 5301, Washington, DC

20590.

All applications submitted must

include a reference to NHTSA

Cooperative Agreement Program No.

DTNH22–H–01–07241. Interested

applicants should contact Mr. Comella

to obtain the application packet.

Included in the application packet are

reports about data linkage and

applications for linked data developed

by the CODES project.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

General administrative questions may

be directed to Joe Comella, Office of

Contracts and Procurement. All

questions and requests for copies may

30980 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 111 / Friday, June 8, 2001 / Notices

be directed by e-mail at

jcomella@nhtsa.dot.gov or, by

telephone, at (202) 366–9568.

Programmatic questions relating to this

cooperative agreement program should

be directed to Barbara Rhea, CODES

Contracting Officer’s Technical

Representative (COTR), at NHTSA,

Room 6125, (NRD–33) 400 7th Street

SW., Washington, DC 20590, or by email at brhea@nhtsa.dot.gov, or by

telephone at (202) 366–2714.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Statement of Work

Background

Crash data alone are unable to convey

the magnitude of the medical and

financial consequences of the injuries

resulting from motor vehicle crashes or

the success of highway safety decisionmaking to prevent them. Outcome

information describing what happens to

all persons involved in motor vehicle

crashes, regardless of injury, are needed.

Person-specific outcome information

is collected at the crash scene and en

route by EMS personnel, at the

emergency department, in the hospital,

and after discharge. When these data are

computerized and merged statewide,

they generate a source of populationbased data that is available for use by

state and local traffic safety and public

health professionals. Linking these

records to statewide crash data collected

by police at the scene is the key to

developing relationships among specific

vehicles, crashes, and occupant

behavior characteristics and their

medical and financial outcomes.

The feasibility of linking crash and

medical outcome (EMS, emergency

department, hospital discharge, death

certificate, claims, etc.) data was

demonstrated by the CODES project.

This project evolved from the

Intermodal Surface Transportation

Efficiency Act of 1991, which mandated

that NHTSA prepare a Report to

Congress about the benefits of safety belt

and motorcycle helmet use. NHTSA

provided funding to the States of

Hawaii, Maine, Missouri, New York,

Pennsylvania, Utah, and Wisconsin to

link their state data and use the linked

data to analyze the effectiveness of

safety belts and motorcycle helmets.

The Report was delivered to Congress in

February 1996. In 1996, three CODES

states (New York, Pennsylvania, and

Wisconsin) and three states which

linked crash and medical data without

CODES funding (Alaska, Connecticut,

and New Mexico) were awarded

NHTSA research funds to develop statespecific applications for linked data. In

1997, NHTSA awarded grants for

CODES linkage to Connecticut, New

Hampshire, Maryland, North Dakota,

South Dakota, Oklahoma, and Nevada.

Iowa, Kentucky, Massachusetts,

Nebraska, and South Carolina were

funded to implement the CODES

linkage in 1998. Arizona, Delaware,

Minnesota and Tennessee were funded

in 1999. Georgia and Rhode Island were

funded in 2000. The CODES project also

demonstrated that linked data have

many uses for decision-making related

to highway safety and injury control. In

addition to demonstrating the

effectiveness of safety belts and

motorcycle helmets in preventing death,

injury, and costs, the linked data were

used to identify populations at risk for

increased injury severity or high health

care costs, the impact of different

occupant behaviors on outcome, the

safety needs at the community level, the

allocation of resources for emergency

medical services, the injury patterns by

type of roadway and geographic

location, and the benefits of

collaboration on data quality. When

crash, vehicle, and behavior

characteristics were linked to outcome

information, decision-makers could

identify those prevention programs that

had the most impact on preventing or

reducing the medical and financial costs

associated with motor vehicle crashes.

Data linkage fulfills expanded data

needs without the additional expense

and delay of new data collection. The

linkage process itself provides feedback

about data quality and content

problems, which leads to improvement

in the state data. Thus, it is in NHTSA’s

interest to encourage states to qualify for

CODES funding. NHTSA benefits from

the improved quality of the state data,

while the states benefit from statespecific medical and financial outcome

information about motor vehicle

crashes.

Objective

The objective of this Cooperative

Agreement program is to provide

resources to the applicant to:

1. Coordinate the development and

institutionalization of the capability to

link state crash and medical outcome

data to identify the medical and

financial consequences of motor vehicle

crashes.

2. Utilize this information in crash

analysis, problem identification, and

program evaluation to improve

decision-making at the local, state, and

national levels related to preventing or

reducing deaths, injuries, and direct

medical costs associated with motor

vehicle crashes.

3. Provide NHTSA with populationbased linked crash and injury data to

analyze specific highway safety issues

of interest to NHTSA in collaboration

with the CODES states.

4. Develop data linkage capabilities as

a means of improving the quality of

state data that support NHTSA’s

national data. State data systems are

stronger and more likely to survive

when developed and supported by state

funds. So, this cooperative agreement is

not intended to fund basic development

of state data systems, but rather to create

linkages among existing state data.

States with insufficient state data to

perform the CODES linkages are

encouraged to expedite the

improvement of their state data with

state resources to become eligible for

CODES funding.

General Project Requirements

The grantees of this cooperative

agreement will be required to:

1. Link statewide population-based

crash to injury data for any two calendar

years available since 1997, to produce a

linked data file that, if not statewide,

reflects a contiguous geographical area

that contains at least three (3) million

residents in which the residents obtain

all levels of emergency medical care

without the need to be transferred

elsewhere, except in rare occurrences,

when involved in motor vehicle crashes.

The linked data must be representative

and generalizable for highway traffic

safety purposes in the state or within an

area in the state. All applicants must be

able to clearly document what data are

available and what data are missing and

the significance of the missing data for

highway traffic safety planning efforts.

a. Develop a state/state-wide CODES

that includes outcome information for

all persons, injured and uninjured,

involved in police reported motor

vehicle crashes.

(1) The CODES should consist of

crash data linked to hospital and either

EMS or emergency department data,

preferably both. States without EMS or

emergency department data are eligible

if this type of outpatient information

can be obtained from insurance claims

data for everyone involved in a crash

that is treated at an outpatient center.

(2) Additional state/area-wide data

(driver licensing, vehicle registration,

citation/conviction records, insurance

claims, HMO/managed care, outpatient

records, etc.) should be linked as

necessary to meet state/area-wide

objectives.

b. Set up processes for collaboration

among the technical experts who

manage the data files being linked.

c. Assign an agency to be responsible

for:

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 111 / Friday, June 8, 2001 / Notices 30981

(1) Obtaining a computer and linkage

software to be dedicated to CODES

activities (the computer and software

resources may not be permanently tied

to an existing computer network in such

a way as to preclude their movement in

the future, as directed by the CODES

Board of Directors, to another

organization more interested in

continuing the linkage and application

for the linked data);

(2) Implementing probabilistic linkage

methodology to facilitate tracking the

crash victim from the scene to final

disposition/recovery using existing

computerized state/area-wide

population-based databases;

(3) Validating the linkage results by

evaluating the rate of false positives and

false negatives among the linked and

unlinked records;

(4) Analyzing the linked data; and

(5) Cross-training sufficient staff to

ensure continuation of the linkage

capability in spite of changes in

organizational priorities or personnel

during or after the project period.

d. Document the file preparation,

linkage and validation processes so that

the linkage can be repeated efficiently

during subsequent years after Federal

funding ends and provide evidence of

this documentation.

e. Provide NHTSA a version of the

linked data file with supporting

documentation that conforms to State

laws and regulations governing patient/

provider confidentiality, yet satisfies

minimum NHTSA data needs.

2. Use the linked data to influence

highway traffic safety and injury control

decision-making by implementing at

least one application of linked data that

is expected to have a positive impact on

reducing death, injury, and direct

medical costs.

3. Use the linked data to prepare

management reports using a format

standardized by NHTSA for a national

CODES report.

4. Develop the computer programs

needed to translate the linked data into

information useful for highway traffic

safety and injury control at the local,

regional, or state/area-wide level.

a. Develop, for access within the

State, a public-use version of the linked

data, copies of which will be distributed

upon request.

b. Develop the resources necessary to

produce and distribute routine reports,

respond to data requests, and provide

access to the linked data for analytical,

management, planning, and other

purposes after Federal funding ends.

c. Use the Internet and other

electronic mechanisms to efficiently

distribute and share information

generated from the linked data.

5. Promote collaboration between the

owners and users of the state/area-wide

data to facilitate data linkage and

applications for linked data.

a. Establish a state/area-wide CODES

collaborative network.

(1) Convene a Board of Directors

consisting of the data owners and major

users of the state/area-wide data. The

CODES Board of Directors will be

responsible for managing and

institutionalizing the linked data,

establishing the data release policies for

the linked data, supporting the activities

of the grantee, ensuring that data linkage

and application activities are

appropriately coordinated within the

state/area, and resolving common issues

related to data accessibility, availability,

completeness, quality, confidentiality,

transfer, ownership, fee for service,

management, etc. The CODES Board of

Directors shall meet bi-monthly.

(2) Convene a CODES Advisory Group

consisting of the CODES Board of

Directors and other stakeholders

interested in the use of linked data to

support highway safety, injury control,

EMS, etc. The CODES Advisory Group

will be informed of the results of the

data linkage, application of the data for

decision-making, the quality of the

state/area-wide data for linkage and the

quality of the linked data for analysis.

The CODES Advisory Group shall meet

twice a year.

b. Promote coordination of the various

stakeholders through use of the Internet,

teleconferencing, joint meetings, and

other mechanisms to ensure frequent

communication among all parties to

minimize the expense of travel.

6. Work collaboratively with NHTSA

to implement the Cooperative

Agreement.

a. Attend Initial Briefing Meeting.

Each grantee shall attend a briefing

meeting (date and time to be scheduled

within 30 days after the award) in

Washington, DC with NHTSA staff. The

purpose of the meeting will be to review

the goals and objectives of the project,

discuss implementation of the linkage

software, review the tasks to be

specified in the action plan for the data

linkage and applications of the linked

data for highway safety or injury control

decision-making and discuss the

agendas for the Board of Directors and

Advisory Group.

b. Submit Detailed Action Plan and

Schedule. Within 30 days after the

briefing meeting, the grantee shall

deliver a detailed action plan and

schedule, covering the remaining

funding period, for accomplishing the

data linkage and incorporating

information generated from linked data

into the processes for highway safety or

injury control decision-making. The

action plan shall be subject to the

technical direction and approval of

NHTSA.

c. Attend Technical Workshops. All

grantees together shall attend two

technology transfer workshops during

project performance at locations

convenient to the majority of CODES

grantees. The first meeting, to be

scheduled during the ninth or tenth

month of funding, will be organized to

share data linkage experiences, discuss

standardized formats for management

reports, review the proposed statespecific highway safety applications of

linked data, and resolve common

problems. The second meeting will be

scheduled approximately 12 months

after the first technical assistance

meeting, at the end of the funding

period, for the purpose of sharing

results and making recommendations

for future CODES projects.

d. Attend National Meeting. At the

direction of the COTR, Grantee shall

attend one National Meeting to report

on progress or results from their CODES

project.

e. Progress Report. Grantee shall

submit quarterly progress reports.

During the period of performance, the

grantee will provide letter-type written

reports to the COTR. These reports will

compare what was proposed in the

Action Plan with actual

accomplishments during the past

quarter; what commitments have been

generated; what follow up and statelevel support is expected; what

problems have been experienced and

what may be needed to overcome the

problems; and what is specifically

planned to be accomplished during the

next quarter. These reports will be

submitted seven days after the end of

each quarter.

f. Develop a plan to institutionalize

the data linkage and applications for

linked data after Federal funding ends.

By the end of the 15th month of

funding, each grantee shall submit a

long-range plan and schedule to

institutionalize data linkage and the use

of linked data for highway safety and

injury control decision-making within

the state.

g. Project Report. The grantee shall

deliver to NHTSA, at the end of the

project, a final report describing the

results of the data linkage process, and

the applications of the linked data

generated during the project.

NHTSA Involvement

NHTSA will be involved in all

activities undertaken as part of the

Cooperative Agreement program and

will:

30982 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 111 / Friday, June 8, 2001 / Notices

1. Provide a Contracting Officer’s

Technical Representative (COTR) to

participate in the planning and

management of the Cooperative

Agreement and coordinate activities

between the grantee and NHTSA.

2. Provide, at no cost to the grantee,

training and technical assistance by a

CODES expert for up to two weeks onsite and off-site during the project to

assist the grantee in preparing the files

for linkage, implementing probabilistic

linkage techniques, validating the

linkage results, developing applications

for the linked data, and organizing the

CODES Board of Directors and Advisory

Group.

3. Develop a format in which the

linked data and supporting

documentation will be delivered to

NHTSA.

4. Conduct Initial Briefing at NHTSA

Headquarters in Washington, DC (Date

and time to be scheduled within 30 days

after the award.) The purpose of the

meeting will be to review the goals and

objectives of the project, discuss

implementation of the linkage software,

identify the tasks to be specified in the

action plan for the data linkage and

applications of the linked data for

highway safety or injury control

decision-making, and discuss agendas

for the Board of Directors and Advisory

Group.

5. Conduct two Technical Assistance

meetings for the purpose of technology

transfer. The first meeting, to be

scheduled during the ninth or tenth

month of funding, will be organized to

share data linkage experiences, develop

a standardized format for management

reports, review the proposed statespecific highway traffic safety

applications of linked data, and resolve

common problems. The second meeting

will be scheduled at the end of the

funding period for the purpose of

sharing results and making

recommendations for future CODES

projects. Locations for the Workshops

will be determined based on the

location of the Grantees. However, for

the purpose of cost estimation, assume

the workshops will be held in

Washington, DC.

6. Collaboratively work with the state

when using the state’s linked data to

analyze and report on specific highway

safety issues.

7. When appropriate, NHTSA will

publish state-specific reports on CODES

applications.

Period of Support

The project study effort described in

this announcement will be supported

through the award of up to three (3)

Cooperative Agreements, depending

upon the merit of the applications

received and the availability of funding.

It is anticipated that individual award

amounts will range from $250,000–

$300,000. Project efforts involving

linkage of the state/area-wide data and

applications for the linked data must be

completed within twenty-one months

after funding.

Eligibility Requirements

The grantee must be a state agency

involved with highway traffic safety,

such as a State Highway Safety Office,

Department of Transportation or other

State agency with demonstrated

activities in the highway traffic safety

areas, to ensure active involvement by

highway traffic safety stakeholders.

States that have previously been funded

to develop CODES are not eligible. Only

one application should be submitted for

a state or area within a state. Because

this Cooperative Agreement program

requires extensive collaboration among

the data owners in order to achieve the

program objectives, it is envisioned that

the grantee agency may need to actively

involve the data owners in the

development of the formal application

and may need to sub-contract activities

with at least one of them to implement

a successful CODES.

While the general eligibility

requirements are broad, applicants are

advised that this Cooperative Agreement

program is not designed to support basic

developmental efforts. Although no

single organization within any state or

area within the state has all of the

required data capabilities, the

application should demonstrate strong

collaborative agreements with the data

owners and access to at least the state/

area-wide crash, hospital, and either

EMS or emergency department data, or

both, by the time of the award. States/

areas that collect at least the date of

birth and zip code of residence on their

crash data and have state/area-wide

health and/or vehicle insurance claims

information may be eligible, in spite of

the lack of EMS or emergency

department information, if the claims

data include everyone involved in

motor vehicle crashes. In addition, it is

important that the applicant indicate the

level of commitment, with state or area

within the state funding and/or shared

resources, by the data owners to meet

program objectives, particularly

institutionalization of the data linkage

and applications for linked data.

Application Procedure

Each applicant must submit one

original and two (2) copies of the

application package to: DOT/National

Highway Traffic Safety Administration,

Office of Contracts and Procurement

(NAD–30), ATTN: Joe Comella, 400 7th

Street, SW., Room 5301, Washington,

DC 20590. Applications must be typed

on one side of the page only.

An additional two (2) copies will

facilitate the review process, but are not

required. Applications must include a

reference to NHTSA Cooperative

Agreement Program Number DTNH22–

01–H–07241. Only complete application

packages received on or before 3 p.m. on

(60 days) will be considered.

Application Contents

1. The application package must be

submitted with OMB Standard Form

424 (REV. 7–97, including 424A and

424B), Application for Federal

Assistance, with the required

information filled in and assurances

signed (SF 424B). While the Form 424A

deals with budget information and

Section B identifies Budget Categories,

the available space does not permit a

level of detail, which is sufficient to

provide for a meaningful evaluation of

the proposed total costs. A

supplemental sheet shall be provided

which presents a detailed breakdown of

the proposed costs (direct labor,

including labor category, level of effort,

and rate; direct materials including

itemized equipment; travel and

transportation, including projected trips

and number of people traveling;

subcontractors/subgrants, with similar

detail, if known; and overhead), as well

as any costs the applicant proposes to

contribute or obtain from other sources

in support of the project. Applicants

shall assume that awards will be made

during September 2001 and should

prepare their applications accordingly.

2. The application shall include a

program narrative statement of not more

than 20 pages, which addresses the

following as a minimum:

a. A brief description of the state/area

in terms of its highway safety and injury

control decision-making processes for

planning, performance monitoring and

other functions aimed at reducing death,

injury, and costs of injuries resulting

from motor vehicle crashes. This

description should indicate how linked

data would make a difference to the

decision-making processes.

b. A brief description of the existing

crash and medical outcome data files

Applicants will link state/area-wide

population-based crash data to EMS

(and/or emergency department or

insurance claims) and hospital

discharge data to obtain medical and

financial outcomes for persons injured

in motor vehicle crashes for any two

calendar years of data available since

1997. Linkages to census, other traffic

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 111 / Friday, June 8, 2001 / Notices 30983

records (vehicle registration, driver

licensing, roadway, conviction/citation,

etc.), insurance claims, etc., are

encouraged to meet priorities for

highway safety and injury control

decision-making. The following

information should be included

describing the state/area-wide data:

(1) The total crashes, total persons

involved in crashes, total victims with

injuries caused by a motor vehicle crash

as identified or estimated and a

descriptive profile of the total injuries

by severity level, if available, state/areawide.

(1) Information about the current

status of the data files to be linked,

recorded using the format below:

Data files

Reporting

threshold

(A)

Rate of compliance with (A)

Data years to be

linked (19XX–

19XX)

Month and year

when most recent

data year will become available

Percent of records

computerized

Can remaining

records be computerized?

(Y/N)

Crash

EMS

ED

Hospital

Other

(2) The data elements chosen to

identify persons and crashes and, for

each, the missing data rate.

(3) The data elements indicating type

of injury, severity of injury, total

charges, a payer source and, for each,

the missing data rate.

c. A brief description of the proposed

sequence for linking the data files.

d. A brief description of how staff

from the various data owners will be

cross-trained in the CODES linkage to

compensate for potential future changes

in organizational priorities and

personnel.

e. A brief description of the process to

be used to ensure adequate

documentation of the data files and

linkage process.

f. A brief description of how the

linked data will be converted into

information useful for the highway

safety and injury control decisionmaking processes for the purpose of

reducing death, injury, and costs

resulting from motor vehicle crashes.

Describe:

(1) The different types of decisionmaking processes, currently being

utilized in the state/area, that identify

highway traffic safety and injury control

objectives and prioritize prevention

programs that have the most impact on

reducing death, injury and direct

medical costs associated with motor

vehicle crashes; and

(2) Why linked data are needed to

make these decision-making processes

more effective and how the data will be

incorporated.

g. A brief description of each member

of the CODES Board of Directors and the

proposed arrangements describing the

management and use of the linked data.

2. The application shall include an

appendix. A large appendix is strongly

discouraged. Materials not listed below

should be included only if it is

necessary to support information about

data linkage, applications for linked

data or institutionalization discussed in

the application. Do not send copies of

brochures, documents, etc., developed

as the result of a collaborative effort in

the state/area. The appendix should

include the following:

a. Letters of support from each

proposed member of the CODES Board

of Directors. A letter of support should

reflect the signer’s level of commitment

to the CODES project and thus should

not be a form letter.

The letter of support should

document:

(1) Why linked data are important to

the agency.

(2) The priority assigned by the

agency to obtain linked data compared

to other responsibilities.

(3) The agency’s level of commitment

in terms of the number of staff and the

dollars or shared resources, which will

be available to support and

institutionalize CODES.

(4) The agency’s willingness to

collaborate with other data owners to

support shared ownership of the linked

data.

(5) The agency’s permission to

collaborate with NHTSA during the

project and to release the linked data (or

description of policies which would

restrict transfer) to NHTSA at the end of

the project.

b. A brief description or letters of

support should be included for the other

stakeholders to be represented on the

CODES Advisory Group. The letters of

support should indicate the

stakeholder’s need for the linked data,

and willingness to facilitate the linkage

of state/area-wide data or use of linked

data for decision-making.

c. A list of activities in chronological

order and a time line to show the

expected schedule of accomplishments

and their target dates.

d. Descriptions of the proposed

project personnel as follows:

(1) Project Director: Include a resume

along with a description of the director’s

leadership capabilities to make the

various stakeholders work together.

(2) Key personnel proposed for the

data linkage and applications of linked

data, and other personnel considered

critical to the successful

accomplishment of this project: include

a brief description of qualifications,

employment status (permanent,

temporary) in the organization, and

respective organizational

responsibilities. The proposed level of

effort in performing the various

activities should also be identified.

e. A brief description of the

applicant’s organizational experience in

performing similar or related efforts,

and the priority that will be assigned to

this project compared to the

organization’s other responsibilities.

f. A brief description of any potential

delays in implementing the project

because of requirements for legislative

approval before CODES funds can be

expended.

g. Data Use Agreement. A description

of the existing State laws and

regulations governing patient/provider

confidentiality in the data files being

linked that would restrict use of the data

for linkage and/or for transfer of the

CODES linked data to NHTSA and

conditions under which the linked data

file may be used by NHTSA.

Application Review Process and

Evaluation Factors

Initially, all application packages will

be reviewed to confirm that the

applicant is an eligible recipient and to

ensure that the application contains all

of the items specified in the Application

Content section of this announcement.

Each complete application from an

eligible recipient will then be evaluated

by an Evaluation committee. The

applications will be evaluated using the

following criteria which are listed in

descending order of importance:

1. Understanding the intent of the

program (30%). The applicant’s

30984 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 111 / Friday, June 8, 2001 / Notices

recognition of the importance of CODES

to obtain medical and financial outcome

data which are necessary for a

comprehensive evaluation of the impact

of highway safety and injury control

countermeasures. The applicant’s

understanding of the importance of

developing CODES as a meaningful and

appropriate strategy for improving

traffic records capabilities and ensuring

the continuation of CODES after

completion of this project.

2. Technical approach for project

completion (30%). The reasonableness

and feasibility of the applicant’s

approach for successfully achieving the

objectives of the project within the

required time frame. The

appropriateness and feasibility of the

applicant’s proposed plans for data

linkage and applications for the linked

data. Evidence that the applicant has the

necessary authorization and support

from data owners to access medical and

non-medical state/area-wide data,

particularly total charges and

information about type and severity of

injury, which are not routinely available

for highway safety analyses and the

necessary authorization to data.

3. Project personnel (20%). The

adequacy of the proposed personnel to

successfully perform the project study,

including qualifications and experience

(both general and project related), the

various disciplines represented, and the

relative level of effort proposed for the

professional, technical and support

staff.

4. Organizational capabilities (20%).

The adequacy of organizational

resources and experience to successfully

manage and perform the project,

particularly to support the collaborative

network and respond to the increasing

demand for access to the linked data.

The proposed coordination with and

use of other organizational support and

resources, including other sources of

financial support. Depending upon the

results of the evaluation process,

NHTSA may choose to alter the number

of awards. In addition, NHTSA may

suggest revisions to applications as a

condition of further consideration to

ensure the most efficient and effective

performance consistent with the

objectives of the project. An

organizational representative of the

National Association of Governors’

Highway Safety Representatives will be

assisting in NHTSA’s technical

evaluation process.

Special Award Selection Factors

After evaluating all applications

received, in the event that insufficient

funds are available to award to all

meritorious applicants, NHTSA may

consider the following special award

factors in the award decision:

1. Priority may be given to those

applicants that have statewide data

available for linkage.

2. Priority may be given to applicants

who have the highest probability of

maintaining the collaborative network

of data owners and users, of

institutionalizing the linkage of the

crash and medical outcome data on a

routine basis, and of continuing to

respond to data requests after the project

is completed.

3. Priority may be given to an

applicant on the basis that the

application fits a profile of providing

NHTSA with a broad range of

population densities (rural through

metropolitan) with different highway

safety needs.

Terms and Conditions of the Award

1. Prior to award, each grantee must

comply with the certification

requirements of 49 CFR part 20,

Department of Transportation New

Restrictions on Lobbying, and 49 CFR

part 29, Department of Transportation

Government-wide Debarment and

Suspension (Non-procurement) and

Government-wide Requirements for

Drug Free Workplace (Grants). In

addition, grantees must certify that data

release agreements have been signed by

the owners of the data files being linked

to transfer the CODES linked database to

NHTSA, according to NHTSA

specifications.

2. Reporting Requirements and

Deliverables:

a. Detailed Action Plan and Schedule.

Within 30 days after the briefing

meeting, the grantee shall deliver a

detailed action plan and schedule for

accomplishing the data linkage and

applications of linked data for decisionmaking, showing any revisions to the

approach proposed in the grantee’s

application. This detailed action plan

will be subject to the technical direction

and approval of NHTSA and will

describe the following:

(1) The personnel who will perform

the tasks.

(2) The time period for obtaining the

different files required for linkage.

(3) The milestones for completing the

various phases of the probabilistic

linkage and validation processes.

(4) The milestones for proposed

meeting schedules and actions by the

Board of Directors and Advisory Group.

(5) Date(s) for providing the linked

data to NHTSA.

(6) The milestones for implementing

the applications.

b. Quarterly Progress Report. During

the performance, the grantee will

provide letter-type written reports to the

NHTSA COTR. These reports will

compare what was proposed in the Plan

of Action with actual accomplishments

during the past quarter; what

commitments have been generated;

what follow-up and state-level support

is expected; what problems have been

experienced and what may be needed to

overcome the problems; and what is

specifically planned to be accomplished

during the next quarter. These reports

will be submitted seven days after the

end of each quarter.

c. Board of Directors and Advisory

Group Meetings. Copies of the agenda

and minutes for each Board of Directors

and Advisory Group Meeting will be

attached to the Progress Report

submitted to NHTSA immediately

following the meeting.

d. Institutionalization Plan. The

grantee shall deliver to NHTSA, by the

end of the 15th month of funding, a

long-range plans and schedule to

institutionalize data linkage and the use

of linked data for highway safety and

injury control decision-making within

the state.

e. Project Report. The grantee shall

deliver to NHTSA, at the end of the

project, a final report that describes the

results of the data linkage process, and

the applications of the linked data. The

report shall follow the content outline

mandated by NHTSA and include the

following:

(1) A description of the state/area

wide linked crash and injury data;

(2) A description of the file

preparation;

(3) A description of the linkage,

validation processes and results;

(4) A description of the extent of the

documentation and how the

documentation will facilitate linkage in

subsequent years;

(5) A discussion of the limitations of

the linked data and subsequent

applications of these data;

(6) A description of the applications

of linked data implemented for

decision-making and results of the

decision-making;

(7) A description of how the data

linkage and use of linked data for

decision-making has been

institutionalized for decision-making;

(8) A description of the

documentation created to facilitate

repeating of the linkage process and an

estimate of how much time is needed to

repeat the linkage in subsequent years;

(9) A copy of the public-use formats

that were successful for incorporating

linked data into the decision-making

processes for highway safety and injury

control; and

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 111 / Friday, June 8, 2001 / Notices 30985

(10) A copy of the management

reports prepared using the standardized

format for the national CODES report.

f. CODES Linked Database. The

grantee shall deliver to NHTSA after

linkage, at the date specified in the

Action Plan, the CODES linked

databases. NHTSA will use the data to

help facilitate the development of data

linkage capabilities at the state/areawide level and to encourage use of the

linked data for decision-making.

The deliverables will include:

(1) The database in an electronic

media and format acceptable to NHTSA,

including all persons, regardless of

injury severity (none, fatal, non-fatal),

involved in a reported motor vehicle

crash for any two calendar years of

available data since 1997, and including

medical and financial outcome

information for those who are linked.

(2) A copy of the file structure for the

linked data file.

(3) Documentation of the definitions

and file structure for each of the data

elements contained in the linked data

files.

(4) An analysis of the quality of the

linked data and a description of any

data bias, which may exist, based on an

analysis of the false positive and false

negative linked records.

3. During the effective performance

period of Cooperative Agreements

awarded as a result of this

announcement, the agreement as

applicable to the grantee shall be subject

to the National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration’s General Provisions for

Assistance Agreements.

H. Keith Brewer,

Acting Associate Administrator for Research

and Development, National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration.

[FR Doc. 01–14493 Filed 6–7–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–12–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Research and Special Programs

Administration

[Docket No. RSPA–00–7126 (PD–24(R))]

New Jersey Restrictions on

Transportation of Blasting Caps With

Other Commercial Explosives

AGENCY: Research and Special Programs

Administration (RSPA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of administrative

determination of preemption by RSPA’s

associate administrator for hazardous

materials safety.

Applicant: Institute of Makers of

Explosives (IME).

Local Laws Affected: New Jersey

Statutes Annotated (N.J.S.A.) 21:1A–

137(F); New Jersey Administrative Code

(N.J.A.C.) 12:190–6.5(d).

Applicable Federal Requirements:

Federal hazardous material

transportation law, 49 U.S.C. 5101 et

seq., and the Hazardous Materials

Regulations (HMR), 49 CFR Parts 171–

180.

Mode Affected: Highway.

SUMMARY: Federal hazardous material

transportation law preempts N.J.S.A.

21:1A–137F and N.J.A.C. 12:190–6.5(d)

when those provisions are interpreted

and applied to prohibit the

transportation of blasting caps

(including electric blasting caps) on the

same motor vehicle with more than

5,000 pounds of explosives, while on a

public road or during activities on

private property that are incidental to

the movement of property and involve

a safety aspect of transportation on a

public road.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Frazer C. Hilder, Office of the Chief

Counsel, Research and Special Programs

Administration, U.S. Department of

Transportation, Washington, DC 20590–

0001 (Tel. No. 202–366–4400).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

In this determination, RSPA considers

whether Federal hazardous material

transportation law, 49 U.S.C. 5101 et

seq., preempts New Jersey statutory and

regulatory restrictions against the

transportation of blasting caps on the

same motor vehicle with more than

5,000 pounds of other commercial

explosives.

In a notice published in the Federal

Register on April 7, 2000, 65 FR 18422,

RSPA invited interested persons to

comment on an application by IME for

a determination that New Jersey’s

statutory and regulatory restrictions are

preempted on two grounds. IME stated

that these restrictions (1) concern the

‘‘handling’’ of a hazardous material in

transportation and are not substantively

the same as requirements in the HMR,

and (2) are an obstacle to the

accomplishing and carrying out the

Federal hazardous material

transportation law and the HMR. In the

notice, RSPA observed that IME’s

application did not indicate ‘‘whether

New Jersey’s restrictions cause

shipments of blasting caps and other

explosives to be routed around the State

of New Jersey, rather than on highways

through the State,’’ and RSPA requested

an explanation of ‘‘the manner in which

the New Jersey requirements are applied

and enforced.’’ 65 FR at 18423, 18424–

25. The full text of IME’s application

was set forth in Appendix A to the

notice.

In response to the April 7, 2000

notice, comments were submitted by the

Hazardous Materials Advisory Council

(HMAC) and the International Society of

Explosives Engineers (ISEE) in support

of IME’s application, and further

comments were submitted by IME. No

comments were received from the State

of New Jersey or any of its agencies, and

no person has opposed IME’s

application.

II. Federal Preemption

Section 5125 of Title 49 U.S.C.

contains several preemption provisions

that are relevant to IME’s application.

Subsection (a) provides that—in the

absence of a waiver of preemption by

DOT under 5125(e) or specific authority

in another Federal law—a requirement

of a State, political subdivision of a

State, or Indian tribe is preempted if

(1) Complying with a requirement of the

State, political subdivision, or tribe and a

requirement of this chapter or a regulation

issued under this chapter is not possible; or

(2) The requirement of the State, political

subdivision, or tribe, as applied or enforced,

is an obstacle to accomplishing and carrying

out this chapter or a regulation prescribed

under this chapter.

These two paragraphs set forth the

‘‘dual compliance’’ and ‘‘obstacle’’

criteria that RSPA had applied in

issuing inconsistency rulings prior to

1990, under the original preemption

provision in the Hazardous Materials

Transportation Act (HMTA). Pub. L. 93–

633, 112(a), 88 Stat. 2161 (1975). The

dual compliance and obstacle criteria

are based on U.S. Supreme Court

decisions on preemption. Hines v.

Davidowitz, 312 U.S. 52 (1941); Florida

Lime & Avocado Growers, Inc. v. Paul,

373 U.S. 132 (1963); Ray v. Atlantic

Richfield, Inc., 435 U.S. 151 (1978).

Subsection (b)(1) of 49 U.S.C. 5125

provides that a non-Federal requirement

concerning any of the following

subjects, that is not ‘‘substantively the

same as’’ a provision of Federal

hazardous material transportation law

or a regulation prescribed under that

law, is preempted unless it is authorized

by another Federal law or DOT grants a

waiver of preemption:

(A) The designation, description, and

classification of hazardous material.

(B) The packing, repacking, handling,

labeling, marking, and placarding of

hazardous material.

(C) The preparation, execution, and use of

shipping documents related to hazardous

material and requirements related to the

number, contents, and placement of those

documents.