Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 117 / Friday, June 17, 2022 / Notices 36579 

1See General Motors, LLC, Denial of Petition for 

Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 85 FR 

71713 (Nov. 10, 2020); see also General Motors 

Corp.; Ruling on Petition for Determination of 

Inconsequential Noncompliance, 69 FR 19897 (Apr. 

14, 2004). 

2See BMW of North America, LLC; Jaguar Land 

Rover North America, LLC; and Autoliv, Inc.; 

Decisions of Petitions for Inconsequential 

Noncompliance, 84 FR 19994 (May 7, 2019) (citing 

General Motors, LLC., Grant of Petition for Decision 

of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 81 FR 92963 

(Dec. 20, 2016)). 

3See Cosco Inc.; Denial of Application of 

Inconsequential Noncompliance, 64 FR 29408 (Jun. 

1, 1999). 

4See Chrysler Group, LLC, Grant of Petition for 

Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance; 81 FR 

30607 (May 17, 2016). 

inconsequential to safety. Vermeer says 

that the subject trailers are ‘‘used by 

professional construction companies, 

not by the general public.’’ In support, 

Vermeer cited several decisions NHTSA 

has published in the past regarding 

consideration in evaluating 

inconsequential noncompliance 

petitions. Vermeer quotes NHTSA as 

saying that ‘‘the issue to consider is the 

consequence to an occupant who is 

exposed to the consequence of that 

noncompliance’’ 1 and that NHTSA also 

considers the ‘‘specific facts before it in 

a particular petition’’ 2 in addition to 

‘‘whether an occupant who is affected 

by the noncompliance is likely to be 

exposed to a significantly greater risk 

than an occupant in a compliant vehicle 

[emphasis added by Vermeer].’’ 3

According to Vermeer, [t]he purpose 

of the tire placard is informational and 

not a substantive performance standard, 

and the missing information is readily 

available to operators from other 

sources.’’ Vermeer notes that along with 

the required information being readily 

available in the owner’s manual, the 

missing information from the tire 

placard can also be found on the tire 

sidewalls and rims installed on the 

subject trailers. Vermeer also notes that 

another source of the missing 

information would be MyVermeer.com. 

Vermeer observes that NHTSA has 

previously granted inconsequentiality 

petitions that pertain to a similar 

noncompliance as the subject petition. 

These include: 

• See Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, 

Grant of Petition for Decision of 

Inconsequential Noncompliance, 84 FR 

25118 (May 30, 2019); 

• See General Motors, LLC, Grant of 

Petition for Decision of Inconsequential 

Noncompliance, 84 FR 25117 (May 30, 

2019); 

• See Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, 

Grant of Petition for Decision of 

Inconsequential Noncompliance, 82 FR 

5640 (January 18, 2017); 

• See Volkswagen Group of America, 

Inc., Grant of Petition for Decision of 

Inconsequential Noncompliance, 81 FR 

88728 (December 8, 2016); 

• See Volkswagen Group of America, 

Grant of Petition for Decision of 

Inconsequential Noncompliance, 81 FR 

28935 (May 10, 2016); 

• See Chrysler Group, LLC, Grant of 

Petition for Decision of Inconsequential 

Noncompliance, 81 FR 30607 (May 17, 

2016); 

• See BMW of North America, LLC, 

Grant of Petition for Decision of 

Inconsequential Noncompliance, 78 FR 

76408 (December 17, 2013); 

• See Chrysler Group, LLC, Grant of 

Petition for Decision of Inconsequential 

Noncompliance, 78 FR 38443 (June 26, 

2013); and 

• See Hyundai-Kia America 

Technical Center, Inc., Grant of Petition 

for Decision of Inconsequential 

Noncompliance, 78 FR 38445 (June 26, 

2013). 

Vermeer emphasized that the 

operators of the subject trailers ‘‘would 

be experienced with and knowledgeable 

about these trailers.’’ Vermeer says that 

the granting of an inconsequentiality 

petition submitted by Chrysler Group 

supports this assertion.4

Last, Vermeer contends that the 

subject trailers meet all of the other 

requirements with FMVSS No. 110 and 

that Vermeer ‘‘is not aware of any 

complaints, claims, or incidents related 

to the subject noncompliance.’’ 

Vermeer concludes that the subject 

noncompliance is inconsequential as it 

relates to motor vehicle safety and that 

its petition to be exempted from 

providing notification of the 

noncompliance, as required by 49 

U.S.C. 30118, and a remedy for the 

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 trailers that Vermeer 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 trailers under their 

control after Vermeer 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) 

Otto G. Matheke, III, 

Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. 

[FR Doc. 2022–13078 Filed 6–16–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2021–0037; Notice 1] 

BMW of North America, LLC, Receipt 

of Petition for Decision of 

Inconsequential Noncompliance 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Receipt of petition. 

SUMMARY: BMW of North America, LLC, 

a subsidiary of BMW AG, Munich, 

Germany, (collectively ‘‘BMW’’), has 

determined that certain Model Year 

(MY) 2018–2021 BMW K 1600 

motorcycles do not fully comply with 

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 

(FMVSS) No. 123, Motorcycle Controls 

and Displays. BMW filed an original 

noncompliance report dated March 18, 

2021, and, subsequently, BMW 

petitioned NHTSA on April 9, 2021, for 

a decision that the subject 

noncompliance is inconsequential as it 

relates to motor vehicle safety. This 

notice announces receipt of BMW’s 

petition. 

DATES: Send comments on or before July 

18, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are 

invited to submit written data, views, 

and arguments on this petition. 

Comments must refer to the docket and 

notice number cited in the title of this 

notice and submitted by any of the 

following methods: 

• Mail: Send comments by mail 

addressed to the U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: Deliver comments 

by hand to the U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, 

Washington, DC 20590. The Docket 

Section is open on weekdays from 10 

a.m. to 5 p.m. except for Federal 

holidays. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
36580 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 117 / Friday, June 17, 2022 / Notices 

• Electronically: Submit comments 

electronically by logging onto the 

Federal Docket Management System 

(FDMS) website at https://

www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Comments may also be faxed to 

(202) 493–2181. 

Comments must be written in the 

English language and be no greater than 

15 pages in length, although there is no 

limit to the length of necessary 

attachments to the comments. If 

comments are submitted in hard copy 

form, please ensure that two copies are 

provided. If you wish to receive 

confirmation that comments you have 

submitted by mail were received, please 

enclose a stamped, self-addressed 

postcard with the comments. Note that 

all comments received will be posted 

without change to https://

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided. 

All comments and supporting 

materials received before the close of 

business on the closing date indicated 

above will be filed in the docket and 

will be considered. All comments and 

supporting materials received after the 

closing date will also be filed and will 

be considered to the fullest extent 

possible. 

When the petition is granted or 

denied, notice of the decision will also 

be published in the Federal Register 

pursuant to the authority indicated at 

the end of this notice. 

All comments, background 

documentation, and supporting 

materials submitted to the docket may 

be viewed by anyone at the address and 

times given above. The documents may 

also be viewed on the internet at https:// 

www.regulations.gov by following the 

online instructions for accessing the 

docket. The docket ID number for this 

petition is shown in the heading of this 

notice. 

DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

Statement is available for review in a 

Federal Register notice published on 

April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477–78). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Frederick Smith, General Engineer, 

NHTSA, Office of Vehicle Safety 

Compliance, (202) 366–7487. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Overview 

BMW has determined that certain MY 

2018–2021 BMW K 1600 motorcycles do 

not fully comply with the requirements 

of paragraph S5.2.5 of FMVSS No. 123, 

Motorcycle Controls and Displays (49 

CFR 571.123). BMW filed a 

noncompliance report dated March 18, 

2021, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, 

Defect and Noncompliance 

Responsibility and Reports. BMW 

subsequently petitioned NHTSA on 

April 9, 2021, for an exemption from the 

notification and remedy requirements of 

49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the basis that 

this noncompliance is inconsequential 

as it relates to motor vehicle safety, 

pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 

30120(h) and 49 CFR part 556, 

Exemption for Inconsequential Defect or 

Noncompliance. 

This notice of receipt of BMW’s 

petition is published under 49 U.S.C. 

30118 and 30120 and does not represent 

any Agency decision or other exercise of 

judgment concerning the merits of the 

petition. 

II. Motorcycles Involved 

Approximately 4,966 MY 2018–2021 

BMW K 1600 GTL, B, and Grand 

America motorcycles manufactured 

between April 13, 2017, and February 

23, 2021, are potentially involved. 

III. Noncompliance 

BMW explains that the 

noncompliance is that the subject 

motorcycles are equipped with 

passenger footrests that fold upward and 

slightly forward, but not rearward, when 

not in use, and, therefore, do not fully 

comply to the requirements specified in 

paragraph S5.2.5 of FMVSS No. 123. 

IV. Rule Requirements 

Paragraph S5.2.5 of FMVSS No. 123 

includes the requirements relevant to 

this petition. Footrests shall be provided 

for each designated seating position. 

Each footrest for a passenger other than 

an operator shall fold rearward and 

upward when not in use. 

V. Summary of BMW’s Petition 

The following views and arguments 

presented in this section, ‘‘V. Summary 

of BMW’s Petition,’’ are the views and 

arguments provided by BMW. They 

have not been evaluated by the Agency 

and do not reflect the views of the 

Agency. BMW describes the subject 

noncompliance and contends that the 

noncompliance is inconsequential as it 

relates to motor vehicle safety. 

In support of its petition, BMW 

submitted the following reasoning: 

1. Passenger Footrest Location: For 

the MY 2021 BMW K 1600 GTL, the 

passenger footrest is attached to the 

mounting bracket and the bracket is 

bolted to the motorcycle frame. Similar 

configurations are applicable to the K 

1600 B and K 1600 Grand America. 

There are slight differences in the 

geometry and mounting locations for the 

passenger footrest between the K 1600 

GTL and the K 1600 B/Grand America. 

The mounting locations for the rider 

footrest are identical, but for the K 1600 

GTL, the mounting location for the 

passenger footrest is higher. 

2. Lean Angle: The lean angle is the 

angle that is subtended by the 

intersection of a plane passing through 

the longitudinal axis of the motorcycle 

when it is upright (vertical), and a plane 

passing through the longitudinal axis of 

the motorcycle when the motorcycle is 

at a specific angle (i.e., the lean angle) 

from upright (vertical). 

3. Ground Contact of Certain 

Components/Distance to Passenger 

Footrest: During a banked turn, although 

there is no possibility for ground contact 

to occur with the passenger footrest, an 

analysis was performed to determine the 

distance between the passenger footrest 

and the ground when other motorcycle 

components contact the ground. 

a. K 1600 GTL: While in a banked 

turn, the first component that could 

contact the ground would be the rider’s 

footrest at an angle of approximately 39 

degrees. At this lean angle, the 

passenger footrest would be at a 

distance to the ground of approximately 

95.4 mm (3.8 in) in a left lean angle, and 

approximately 93.9 mm (3.7 in) in a 

right lean angle. 

If the rider continued to increase the 

lean angle, other components, such as 

the engine spoiler, or the engine 

protection guard (if equipped), at 

approximately 43 degrees, would 

contact the ground. At this lean angle, 

the passenger footrest would be at a 

distance to the ground of approximately 

63.3 mm (2.5 in) in a left lean angle, and 

approximately 61.8 mm (2.4 in) in a 

right lean angle. The distance-to-ground 

measurements for the passenger footrest, 

if it were even possible for the silencer 

to contact the ground at a lean angle of 

approximately 46 degrees (left) and 

approximately 47.9 degrees (right), was 

calculated, see Table 1 below. 

b. K 1600 B/K 1600 Grand America: 

Similar to the analysis for the K 1600 

GTL, analyses were performed for the K 

1600 B and the K 1600 Grand America. 

In a banked turn, if the rider continued 

to increase the lean angle, there are a 

number of components that would 

contact the ground, and at those points, 

the passenger footrest would be several 

inches from the ground. 

c. K 1600 Grand America: Please note 

that for the K 1600 Grand America, the 

rider floorboard and the engine 

protection guard are standard 

equipment. While in a banked turn, the 

first component that could contact the 

ground would be the rider’s floorboard 

at an angle of approximately 34.5 

degrees. At this lean angle, the 

passenger footrest would be at a 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 117 / Friday, June 17, 2022 / Notices 36581 

distance to the ground of approximately 

85.1 mm (3.4 in) in a left lean angle, and 

approximately 83.5 mm (3.3 in) in a 

right lean angle. 

If the rider continued to increase the 

lean angle, the rider’s footrest could 

contact the ground at an angle of 

approximately 39 degrees. At this lean 

angle, the passenger footrest would be at 

a distance to the ground of 

approximately 51.1 mm (2.0 in) in a left 

lean angle, and approximately 49.5 mm 

(1.9 in) in a right lean angle. If the rider 

continued to increase the lean angle, the 

silencer, at approximately 42 degrees, 

would contact the ground. At this lean 

angle, the passenger footrest would be at 

a distance to the ground of 

approximately 24.4 mm (1.0 inches) in 

a left-leaning condition and 

approximately 18.8 mm (0.7 inches) in 

a right-leaning condition. 

d. K 1600 B: While in a banked turn, 

the first component that could contact 

the ground would be the rider’s footrest 

at an angle of approximately 39 degrees. 

At this lean angle, the passenger footrest 

would be at a distance to the ground of 

approximately 51.1 mm (2.0 in) in a left 

lean angle, and approximately 49.5 mm 

(1.9 in) in a right lean angle. 

If the rider continued to increase the 

lean angle, the passenger footrest would 

be at a distance to the ground of 

approximately 24.4 mm (1.0 inches) in 

a left-leaning condition, and 

approximately 18.8 mm (0.7 inches) in 

a right-leaning condition. 

e. Summary Table for All Models: A 

summary of the measurements is 

contained in Tables 1 and 2 below. 

Table 1 includes the motorcycle models, 

components that were used in the 

analyses, and the lean angles for the 

various components. Table 2 contains 

the distance to the ground of the 

passenger footrest when specific 

components are in contact with the 

ground. 

TABLE 1 

Model K 1600 GTL K 1600 B K 1600 GA K 1600 GTL K 1600 B/K 1600 GA 

Component Std/Opt/Acc Std/Opt/Acc Std/Opt/Acc 

Lean angle 

left 

(deg) 

Lean angle 

right 

(deg) 

Lean angle 

left 

(deg) 

Lean angle 

right 

(deg) 

Rider Footrest ............................. Std ................. Std ................. Std ................. 39 39 39 39 

Engine Protection Guard ............. Opt ................. Opt ................. Std ................. 43 43 43 43 

Rider Floorboard ......................... Not available .. Acc ................. Std ................. N/A N/A 34.5 34.5 

LED Auxiliary Light ...................... Opt ................. Opt ................. Opt ................. 43 43 43 43 

Engine Spoiler ............................. Std ................. Std ................. Std ................. 43.5 43.5 43.5 43.5 

Gear Lever .................................. Std ................. Std ................. Std ................. 42.5 N/A 42.5 N/A 

Foot Brake ................................... Std ................. Std ................. Std ................. N/A 43.7 N/A 43.7 

Silencer ....................................... Std ................. Std ................. Std ................. 46 47.9 42 42 

Side Stand ................................... Std ................. Std ................. Std ................. 46 N/A 43.8 N/A 

Center Stand ............................... Std ................. Opt ................. Opt ................. 46 46 42.5 42.5 

Engine Protector Pad .................. Std ................. Std ................. Std ................. 48.5 47.9 48.5 47.9 

TABLE 2 

Model K 1600 GTL K 1600 B/K 1600 Grand America 

Component 

Lean angle 

left 

(deg) 

Distance to 

ground 

(mm) 

Lean angle 

right 

(deg) 

Distance to 

ground 

(mm) 

Lean angle 

left 

(deg) 

Distance to 

ground 

(mm) 

Lean angle 

right 

(deg) 

Distance to 

ground 

(mm) 

Passenger Footrest .......... 39 95.4 39.0 93.9 34.5 85.1 34.5 83.5 

43 63.3 43.0 61.8 39.0 51.1 39.0 49.5 

46 39.3 47.9 22.5 42.0 24.4 42.0 18.8 

4. Test Rides to Assess Component 

Contact with Ground: Test rides were 

conducted with a K 1600 GTL and with 

a K 1600 Grand America to evaluate the 

issue in a dynamic/real-world 

environment. Brief on-board videos 

were taken to provide a close-up view 

of certain components prior to, and at, 

contact with the Ground. 

a. K 1600 GTL: When the rider is 

performing a banked turn and is just 

starting to increase the lean angle, at 

this point no component has contacted 

the ground. As the angle increases, the 

rider achieves an angle where the rider’s 

footrest first starts to contact the ground 

and is evident by white ‘‘sparks’’ as a 

result of the contact. At this point, the 

passenger footrest is still approximately 

several inches from the ground. 

b. K 1600 B/Grand America: A similar 

video for the K 1600 Grand America 

depicts a similar condition. As the rider 

increases the lean angle in a banked 

turn, the rider’s footrest will eventually 

contact the ground and, at that point, 

the passenger footrest is still 

approximately several inches from the 

ground. 

5. Conclusion: While in a banked 

turn, there is no possibility for the 

passenger footrest to contact the ground. 

If the lean angle is increased, there are 

a number of motorcycle components 

that would contact the ground and, at 

those points, the passenger footrest is 

still approximately several inches from 

the ground. 

6. Field Experience: BMW has not 

received any complaints from vehicle 

owners and is not aware of any 

accidents or injuries that have occurred 

as a result of this issue. 

7. Vehicle Production: Vehicle 

production has been corrected to 

conform to paragraph S5.2.25 of FMVSS 

No. 123. 

BMW concludes that the subject 

noncompliance is inconsequential as it 

relates to motor vehicle safety and that 

its petition to be exempted from 

providing notification of the 

noncompliance, as required by 49 

U.S.C. 30118, and a remedy for the 

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 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
36582 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 117 / Friday, June 17, 2022 / Notices 

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) 

Otto G. Matheke, III, 

Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. 

[FR Doc. 2022–13080 Filed 6–16–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Bureau of Transportation Statistics 

[Docket ID Number DOT–OST–2014–0031] 

Agency Information Collection: 

Activity Under OMB Review; Part 249, 

Preservation of Records 

AGENCY: Office of the Assistant 

Secretary for Research and Technology 

(OST–R), Bureau of Transportation 

Statistics (BTS), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: In compliance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this 

notice announces that the Information 

Collection Request (ICR) abstracted 

below has been forwarded to the Office 

of Management and Budget (OMB) for 

reinstatement of an expired collection. 

The ICR describes the nature of the 

information collection and its expected 

burden. The Federal Register Notice 

with a 60-day comment period soliciting 

comments on the following collection of 

information was published on March 

25, 2022 (87 FR page 17136). DOT 

received a comment from an individual 

stating that DOT should continue to 

require air carriers to retain paper 

complaint forms and submit the forms 

to DOT’s Bureau of Transportation 

Statistics (BTS) because the online DOT 

form is insufficient. We note that this 

PRA action pertains only to how long 

air carriers must retain certain records, 

including any complaints received. DOT 

is not in any way through this PRA 

action affecting the ability of persons to 

file a complaint against an air carrier. 

The comment has been referred to the 

DOT Office of Aviation Consumer 

Protection for evaluation. 

DATES: Written comments should be 

submitted by July 18, 2022. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff 

Gorham, Office of Airline Information, 

RTS–42, Room E34–414, OST–R, BTS, 

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, 

Washington, DC 20590–0001, 

Telephone Number (202) 366–4406, Fax 

Number (202) 366–3383 or EMAIL 

jeff.gorham@dot.gov. 

Comments: Written comments and 

recommendations for the proposed 

information collection should be sent 

within 30 days of publication of this 

notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/ 

PRAMain. Find this particular 

information collection by selecting 

‘‘Currently under 30-day Review—Open 

for Public Comments’’ or by using the 

search function. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

OMB Approval No.: 2138–0006. 

Title: Preservation of Air carrier 

Records—14 CFR part 249. 

Form No.: None. 

Type of Review: Extension of a 

currently approved collection. 

Respondents: Certificated air carriers 

and charter operators. 

Number of Respondents: 89 

certificated air carriers and 280 charter 

operators. 

Estimated Time per Response: 3 hours 

per certificated air carrier, 1 hour per 

charter operator. 

Total Annual Burden: 547 hours. 

This collection needs a new OMB 

control number as it was previously and 

erroneously entered into ROCIS as a 

generic collection. 

Needs and Uses: Part 249 requires the 

retention of records such as: general and 

subsidiary ledgers, journals and journal 

vouchers, voucher distribution registers, 

accounts receivable and payable 

journals and legers, subsidy records 

documenting underlying financial and 

statistical reports to DOT, funds reports, 

consumer records, sales reports, 

auditors’ and flight coupons, air 

waybills, etc. Depending on the nature 

of the document, the carrier may be 

required to retain the document for a 

period of 30 days to 3 years. Public 

charter operators and overseas military 

personnel charter operators must retain 

documents which evidence or reflect 

deposits made by each charter 

participant and commissions received 

by, paid to, or deducted by travel agents, 

and all statements, invoices, bills and 

receipts from suppliers or furnishers of 

goods and services in connection with 

the tour or charter. These records are 

retained for 6 months after completion 

of the charter program. 

Not only is it imperative that carriers 

and charter operators retain source 

documentation, but it is critical that we 

ensure that DOT has access to these 

records. Given DOT’s established 

information needs for such reports, the 

underlying support documentation must 

be retained for a reasonable period of 

time. Absent the retention requirements, 

the support for such reports may or may 

not exist for audit/validation purposes 

and the relevance and usefulness of the 

carrier submissions would be impaired, 

since the data could not be verified to 

the source on a test basis. 

The Confidential Information 

Protection and Statistical Efficiency Act 

of 2002 (44 U.S.C. 3501 note), requires 

a statistical agency to clearly identify 

information it collects for non-statistical 

purposes. BTS hereby notifies the 

respondents and the public that BTS 

uses the information it collects under 

this OMB approval for non-statistical 

purposes including, but not limited to, 

publication of both Respondent’s 

identity and its data, submission of the 

information to agencies outside BTS for 

review, analysis and possible use in 

regulatory and other administrative 

matters. 

Comments are invited on: whether the 

proposed record retention requirements 

are necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of the 

Department. Comments should address 

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 in Washington, DC, on June 21, 

2022. 

William Chadwick Jr., 

Director, Office of Airline Information, 

Bureau of Transportation Statistics. 

[FR Doc. 2022–13113 Filed 6–16–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–9X–P 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1