Comments_OMB Part A rev2.4.25

OMB Control#: TBD Expiration Date: TBD

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Information Collection Request Supporting Statements: Part A

Examining the Effectiveness of Lane Departure Warning and Lane Keep Assist Advanced Driver Assistance Systems for Improving Driver Response

OMB Control No. 2127-NEW

A. Justification

1. Explain the circumstances that make the collection of information necessary. Identify any legal and administrative requirements that necessitate the collection. Attach a copy of the appropriate section of each statute and regulation mandating or authorizing the collection of information.

   1. Circumstances making the collection necessary.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s (NHTSA) mission is to save lives, prevent injuries, and reduce traffic-related health care and other economic costs. To further this mission, NHTSA conducts research as a foundation for the development of motor vehicle standards and traffic safety programs. Lane departure crashes, including single-vehicle run-off-road crashes, non-collision rollovers, sideswipe crashes, and head-on crashes between two vehicles traveling in opposite directions, account for a large proportion of fatal and injury crashes on U.S. roads. Lane Support Systems (LSS), a type of lateral-control Advanced Driver Assistance System (ADAS), predominantly comprise two complementary technologies: Lane Departure Warning (LDW) and Lane Keeping Assistance (LKA). LDW detects and alerts drivers when their vehicle is about to leave the current travel lane, whereas LKA redirects the lateral movement of the vehicle to prevent it from leaving the current travel lane. Numerous studies have estimated the effectiveness of LSS technologies on police-reported crashes, all of which found a positive impact. Based on the comparison of multiple prevention systems and warning-only systems, previous studies have suggested that prevention systems are more effective than warning-only systems^1,2 because they do not rely on a timely and appropriate response from the driver. Crash situations typically unfold quickly; thus, by the time the driver responds to the warning, it may be too late, particularly when the driver is distracted, drowsy, or fails to notice the warning right away. Therefore, the effectiveness of warning systems largely depends on human factors. While studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of LSS systems at reducing the intended crash types and the potential of LSS to save countless lives with widespread use, these systems are unfortunately associated with a high “nuisance” factor resulting from false or unnecessary alerts. This often leads to system deactivation, with indications that drivers turn LDW off as much as 50 percent of the time due to annoying alerts and overly aggressive steering corrections.^3,4 Once deactivated, all potential benefits of LSS are negated. Thus, it is important to reduce false alerts to maximize driver acceptance and the likelihood that the system remains enabled, which, in turn, will reduce crashes. LSS technologies, if properly designed, evaluated, and used, have the potential to reduce the occurrence or, at the very least, mitigate the severity of a significant number of lane-departure crashes. NHTSA needs to learn more about effectiveness, about the human factors that affect LDW and LKA performance, and about the system characteristics that will favor a better acceptance of the systems. This data collection has been specifically designed to evaluate key LSS-related technologies, with a particular focus on driver and system performance and driver acceptance.

2. Statute authorizing the collection of information.

NHTSA was established by the Highway Safety Act of 1970 (23 U.S.C. 101). Its Congressional mandate is to reduce the number of deaths, injuries, and economic losses resulting from motor vehicle crashes on our nation’s highways. To accomplish this mission, NHTSA has statutory authority to conduct crash injury research and collect relevant data in the interest of public health. Specifically, NHTSA is authorized to: (1) engage in research on all phases of highway safety and traffic conditions; (2) undertake collaborative research and development projects with non-federal entities for the purposes of crash data collection and analysis; and (3) conduct research and collect information to determine the relationship between motor vehicles and crashes, and personal injury or deaths resulting from such crashes. This information collection supports the department’s strategic goal of safety.

Subchapter V of Chapter 301 of Title 49 of the United States Code (U.S.C.) authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to conduct “motor vehicle safety research, development, and testing programs and activities, including activities related to new and emerging technologies that impact or may impact motor vehicle safety.” 49 U.S.C. 30182. Pursuant to Section 1.95 of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), the Secretary has delegated this authority to NHTSA.

2. Indicate how, by whom, and for what purpose the information is to be used. Except for a new collection, indicate the actual use the agency has made of the information received from the current collection.

This is a new, one-time data collection that the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute (VTTI) will conduct under a task order contract with NHTSA. The data collection will include the development and instrumentation of two research vehicles followed by a data collection effort consisting of two separate driving sessions. A group of volunteer participants, each with a valid driving license, will be recruited by VTTI to participate in the study. The participants will drive the instrumented vehicles in a combination of controlled driving tests on the Smart Roads facilities (controlled-access test tracks built to Federal Highway Administration standards) and prescribed driving tests on public roads local to VTTI in and around Blacksburg, VA. Each part of the study will be specifically designed to collect data necessary to answer the following research questions.

• Why do drivers turn LDW alerts off? What keeps the system turned on?

• What alert characteristics (e.g., auditory alert, haptic alert, visual component, or a combination) available for LDW yield the highest rates of driver acceptance?

• Where the interface design plays a role keeping it on, how difficult is it to turn the system off?

• How does modality influence performance/effectiveness (behavioral outcome) of the alert?

• Is there an additional safety benefit associated with LDW alerts when LKA is activated?

• Does the timing of the alert affect driver reaction?

• If a safety system is active, does alert prior to activation influence the outcome?

NHTSA will use the information gathered to produce a technical report that presents the results of the study. The report will provide summary statistics and aggregate tables, and a de-identified data set will be made available to the public. The report will not include any personally identifiable information. The technical report will also be shared with stakeholders interested in improving road safety. The report will provide important information needed by NHTSA to develop, implement, and maintain effective countermeasures that meet the agency’s mandate to reduce the number of deaths, injuries, and economic losses resulting from motor vehicle crashes on the U.S. highways.

3. Describe whether, and to what extent, the collection of information involves the use of automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses, and the basis for the decision for adopting this means of collection. Also describe any considerations of using information technology to reduce burden.

Associated forms and questionnaire will be completed on paper. The decision to use paper is based on the use of intake rooms without a dedicated computer, for providing participants with a copy of the informed consent form, and for completion of questionnaires when administered in the vehicle. Participants will be screened over the phone to determine eligibility, with recruitment personnel recording responses on a paper form using an anonymized ID. The Informed Consent requires the participant’s signature on two copies, one of which is provided to the participant as theirs to keep. The questionnaires include a mix of paper copies that participants will be asked to fill out and paper copies that experimenters will fill out via verbal administration of the questionnaire items. Paper forms will be used for ease of administration. Data from paper forms will be entered by study personnel into electronic spreadsheets that are stored on secure servers with other study-related data.

In-vehicle driving data will be collected electronically via the Data Acquisition System (DAS). The DAS will capture and synchronize video and sensor input data from the experimental vehicles developed in the study. The DAS includes cameras at various angles to capture both vehicle interior and exterior views. This will allow for a view of the upper body of the driver (including the head and face, the torso, and the upper extremities) inside the vehicle cabin, the environment outside the vehicle, and the instrument cluster. The DAS also includes a commercial forward-camera system to provide lane information and an inertial measurement unit to provide accurate test vehicle motion. The system will also include an advanced global positioning system receiver that will allow tracking of routes driven and support accurate trip distance calculations. The main unit of the DAS, which houses the data storage drive and data processing components, will be installed in the rear storage area of the vehicle using automotive grade fixtures and materials to ensure that each element remains securely in place. Therefore, the study participants will not interact with the DAS. The digital videos and vehicle sensor data will be stored on a VTTI secure user-authenticated server until a research need no longer exists. By signing the Informed Consent form, participants agree to VTTI’s possession of the collected video and vehicle data, to be used for research-related demonstration purposes.

4. Describe efforts to identify duplication. Show specifically why any similar information already available cannot be used or modified for use for the purposes described in Item 2 above.

This is a one-time data collection and is only applicable to the study described above. In the first phase of this project, a thorough literature review was conducted. The results of the review show that no similar data currently exist. The agency is not aware of any other public or private sources of similar information to the one targeted by this data collection.

5. If the collection of information involves small businesses or other small entities, describe the methods used to minimize burden.

This collection of information does not involve any small businesses or other small entities. All the participants in this study are individuals meeting certain criteria and who volunteer for the study.

6. Describe the consequences to Federal program or policy activities if the collection is not collected or collected less frequently.

NHTSA’s mission is to save lives, prevent injuries, and reduce traffic-related health care and other economic costs. The outcomes of this data collection will provide a wide variety of stakeholders with valuable information about the optimal LSS design features to maximize the safety benefits of these systems and will inform the development of future motor vehicle standards and traffic safety programs by NHTSA. If this data collection were not conducted, the agency would lose an opportunity to generate evidence crucial to supporting informed decisions towards increased acceptance and use of systems that have the potential to increase motor vehicle safety.

7. Explain any special circumstances that would cause an information collection to be conducted in a manner:

   1. requiring respondents to report information to the agency more often than quarterly;

   2. requiring respondents to prepare a written response to a collection of information in fewer than 30 days after receipt of it;

   3. requiring respondents to submit more than an original and two copies of any document;

   4. requiring respondents to retain records, other than health, medical, government contract, grant-in-aid, or tax records, for more than three years;

   5. in connection with a statistical survey, that is not designed to produce valid and reliable results that can be generalized to the universe of study;

   6. requiring the use of a statistical data classification that has not been reviewed and approved by OMB;

   7. that includes a pledge of confidentiality that is not supported by authority established in statute or regulation, that is not supported by disclosure and data security policies that are consistent with the pledge, or which unnecessarily impedes· sharing of data with other agencies for compatible confidential use; or

   8. requiring respondents to submit proprietary trade secrets, or other confidential information unless the agency can demonstrate that it has instituted procedures to protect the information's confidentiality to the extent permitted by law.

NHTSA is requesting an exemption to the requirement at 5 CFR 1320.5(d)(2)(vi) to allow NHTSA to use a statistical data classification that has not been reviewed and approved by OMB. Specifically, NHTSA seeks to use the seven minimum categories for race and ethnicity in lieu of collecting more detailed information as specified in Statistical Policy Directive No. 15: Standards for Maintaining, Collecting, and Presenting Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity (SPD 15). Since NHTSA’s estimates that, at most, 80 individuals will participate in the research study, we do not anticipate having sufficient numbers of respondents in the detailed race/ethnicity categories to permit analysis with them. Additionally, because of the small sample size, we anticipate that much of the detailed race/ethnicity data would need to be suppressed in the final de-identified dataset in order to protect respondents’ privacy. Therefore, we are requesting to use the seven minimum categories for race/ethnicity.

Other than the request for exemption regarding SPD 15, there are no special circumstances that require this collection to be conducted in a manner inconsistent with 5 CFR 1320.5(d)(2).

8. If applicable, provide a copy and identify the date and page number of publication in the Federal Register of the agency’s notice, required by 5 CFR 1320.8(d) soliciting comments on this collection of information prior to submission to OMB. Summarize public comments received in response to the notice and describe the agency’s actions in response to the comments. Specifically address comments received on cost and hour burden. Describe efforts to consult with persons outside the agency to obtain their views on the availability of data, frequency of collection, the clarity of instructions and recordkeeping, disclosure, or reporting format, and on the data elements to be recorded, disclosed, or reported.

NHTSA published a 60-day notice on September 3, 2024 requesting comment on NHTSA’s intention to submit this ICR to OMB for approval (89 FR 71777). NHTSA received one comment.

NHTSA received one public comment from the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT). The commenter began with, “TxDOT agrees with NHTSA’s conclusion that more research is required to understand the effectiveness of lane support systems, the human factors affecting LDW and LKA technologies, and the features in these systems that lead to increased acceptance and adoption.” TxDOT requested that NHTSA “consider asking participants if they received any specialized training, at the time of a new vehicle’s purchase, on the use and operations of LDW and LKA systems.” TxDOT believes that this information will provide a more comprehensive view of the efficacy of these technologies. NHTSA concurs with this comment and has added a question to NHTSA Form 1843—Knowledge Experience Questionnaire to acquire this information.

9. Explain any decisions to provide any payment or gift to respondents, other than remuneration of contractors or grantees.

Study participants who make it past the eligibility screening are compensated for the opportunity cost for their time invested in the study. Participants will receive $360 based on full participation; $140 will be paid after the first session and the remaining $220 after the second session. The Virginia hourly rate for labor is currently $34.91⁵. The entirety of participation in the study is estimated at 9 hours. At the Virginia hourly labor rate, an individual would be paid $314.19. The agency believes that compensating individuals at $360 for complete participation in the study will ensure that participants feel that they are being fairly compensated by local labor standards, which will ensure participants are timely and cooperative during the experiment. The agency also based this compensation decision on rates that the contractor has paid participants in past research studies sponsored by the U.S. Department of Transportation. Individuals who initiate the study but withdraw before the conclusion of the study will also be compensated. If an individual withdraws before the conclusion of the first session, they will be compensated via a prorated amount per an hourly rate of $40. Individuals who complete the first session, return for, and initiate the second session but withdraw before the conclusion of the session will be compensated via a prorated amount per the hourly rate of $40.

10. Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents and the basis for the assurance in statute, regulation, or agency policy. If the collection requires a system of records notice (SORN) or privacy impact assessment (PIA), those should be cited and described here.

Participants who are qualified and choose to participate in this study will complete an Institutional Review Board (IRB)-approved informed consent process that explains that (a) VTTI and NHTSA will maintain the confidentiality of all personally identifying data and information collected in connection with this study to the extent provided by law, and (b) no personally identifiable information will be published or shared with any organization. The published results will provide only summary statistics that cannot be used to identify any individual or an individual’s responses. All data sets that contain individual level study data will be de-identified. This data collection does not require a SORN or a PIA.

11. Provide additional justification for any questions of a sensitive nature, such as sexual behavior or attitudes, religious beliefs, and other matters that are commonly considered private. This justification should include the reasons why the agency considers the questions necessary, the specific uses to be made of the information, the explanation to be given to persons from whom the information is requested, and any steps to be taken to obtain their consent.

We inquire about general health history as a safety precaution to screen for conditions that could prove dangerous to the individual or a research staff member. The responses to these health history questions are not recorded or reported on in the final dataset but are used as a screening tool.

12. Provide estimates of the hour burden of the collection of information on the respondents and estimates of the annualized labor cost to respondents associated with that hour burden.

Annual burden hours were estimated by first dividing the total number of respondents per information collection by three and then rounding to the nearest whole number. Based on the estimates of 113 annual respondents for the screener questionnaire, 28 annual respondents for the informed consent, 27 annual respondents to each of the Session 1 information collections, 16 annual respondents to each of the Session 2 LDW Subset information collections, and 11 annual respondents to each of the Session 2 LDW/LKA Subset information collections, NHTSA has estimated that the annual burden for the collections is 272 hours. The total estimated burden for this one-time information collection is 808 hours.

To calculate the opportunity cost to participants in this study, NHTSA used the average (mean) hourly earnings from employers in all industry sectors in the State of Virginia, which the Bureau of Labor Statistics lists at $34.91.⁶ Each of the Information Collection Components will be completed for the duration specified in Table 1. These costs are calculated as opportunity costs rather than labor costs, as these respondents are not participating as part of employment time with additional benefits associated. NHTSA estimated the opportunity cost for each form (and associated study activities) and arrived at a total opportunity cost of $28,193 based on a total of 808 hours and an annual opportunity cost of $9,488 and 272 burden hours. Strict division of the totals by three does not equate due to rounding requirements through ROCIS.

This ICR includes 11 information collections, which are described below. Total burden estimates for each information collection are provided in Table 1 and annual burden estimates for each information collection are provided in Table 2.

1. Recruitment Screener

An estimated 340 total respondents (113 respondents annually) will answer a Recruitment Screener over the phone to determine if they qualify for the study. Participants will be screened over the phone to determine eligibility, with recruitment personnel recording responses on a paper form using an anonymized ID. Respondents are expected to take an estimated average of 15 minutes to complete the questionnaire and will complete this questionnaire once, resulting in a total of 85 burden hours (28 annual burden hours) for the screening of potential participants. Recruitment of study respondents is from Southwest Virginia, specifically the New River Valley and surrounding areas (Roanoke, Salem, etc.).

2. Informed Consent

Based on an estimate that 25 percent of those who begin the screening process will be eligible and interested in participating, we anticipate an estimated 85 total participants (28 respondents annually) for the consenting process; these participants will be individually scheduled for an appointment to go to the contractor's facilities in Blacksburg, VA. While NHTSA estimates that 85 respondents will start the informed consent, NHTSA estimates that only 80 (27 respondents annually) will complete informed consent, anticipating that either some respondents may choose not to proceed with the study or that the experimenter may determine that they should not participate (uncooperative, impaired, etc.). The visit to the VTTI facility will begin with a consenting process that includes an overview of the study, an explanation of the consent form, and an opportunity for the potential participants to ask questions and get clarification. Those individuals who consent to the study and enroll will complete the Informed Consent form and move on to the next process. This consent process and completion of the Informed Consent form, using the maximum of 85 respondents (28 annually), are expected to take 30 minutes and will be completed only during the first session, resulting in a total of 43 burden hours (14 annual burden hours). This is a paper form, which participants are required to sign two copies of, keeping one for their records.

3. Vision-Hearing Form

Following the consenting process, the experimenter will administer a brief vision and hearing evaluation for a maximum of 80 respondents over the course of the study (27 respondents annually). The purpose of this evaluation is to ensure that participants meet the basic vision requirements of driver's licensure in Virginia (20/40), and to confirm that they can hear instructions provided by the experimenter when looking away. The hearing evaluation consists of repeating approximately five statements back to the experimenter. Results will be completed only during the first session and will be recorded on paper. This evaluation is expected to take 5 minutes, resulting in a total of 7 total burden hours (2 annual burden hours).

4. Knowledge Experience Questionnaire

Following the vision and hearing evaluation, respondents will be asked to complete a 10-minute Knowledge Experience Questionnaire (on paper) related to their previous knowledge of and experience with the systems under evaluation. Completion of this form will take 10 minutes per person and is to be completed once per respondent for a maximum of 80 respondents (27 respondents annually), resulting in a total of 13 burden hours (5 annual burden hours).

5. Session 1 Controlled Driving

To assess preferences regarding LDW modality and timing under dynamic scenarios, study participants will experience a series of controlled driving tests with the LDW mockup vehicle on the Smart Roads test track. Each participant will drive continuously on closed loops while experiencing modality and timing conditions (independent and in combination, where applicable) incorporated in the LDW mockup vehicle, while data are collected by the DAS. No other traffic will be present on the part of the Smart Roads in use during participant sessions. After the participant performs a few loops to become familiar with the vehicle and the test track without instructions to depart the lane, they will be instructed to gradually deviate towards one of the lines until the departure warnings are triggered. Drivers will then be instructed to carefully perform a corrective maneuver back to the center of the lane after the warning. Not including the questionnaire elements referenced below, this driving session is expected to take 100 minutes, including vehicle familiarization, drive-time, and breaks. For a maximum of 80 participants (27 respondents annually), this results in a total of 133 burden hours (45 annual burden hours).

6. Session 1 Post-Condition Questionnaire

During the behind-the-wheel session, drivers will provide feedback via questionnaires administered by the experimenter. This “post-condition” questionnaire, with an estimated time to complete of 5 minutes, will be administered up to 12 times for a total time of 60 minutes per participant. Note that this allotted time is in addition to the actual driving time. Administered to up to 80 participants (27 respondents annually), this results in a total of 80 burden hours (27 annual burden hours). By experiencing variations of LDW modality and timing, participants will be better equipped to provide acceptance and preference feedback across the experienced options.

7. Session 1 Post-Session Questionnaire

Following completion of the full driving session, participants will be asked to complete a final post-drive questionnaire, capturing feedback pertaining to all conditions experienced. Administered to up to 80 participants (27 respondents annually), the estimated time to complete is 5 minutes, for a total of 7 burden hours (2 annual burden hours). At the conclusion of this first driving session and questionnaires, participants will receive instruction to return on another day for the second session.

Prescribed Driving on Public Roads (Session 2)

To assess driver response to naturally occurring LDW and LKA actuations, two independent driving data collection efforts will be conducted on public roads in Southwest Virginia (the community surrounding the VTTI facility). The drivers who complete the controlled driving sessions will return to the contractor's facilities for a second session, during which they will be put into one of two groups (48 respondents total in the first group and 32 respondents total in the second, thus 16 and 11 respondents annually in the respective groups) and asked to individually drive a pre-determined (prescribed) route using one of the test vehicles, experiencing different modality, activation timing, and variation of LDW, LKA, and LDW/LKA conditions while driving as they normally would.

8. Session 2 Naturalistic Driving: LDW Subset

Each participant in the first group (16 respondents annually) will drive a prescribed route using the LDW mockup vehicle. Each driving session will be part of a sub-study that aims to clarify the effects of the two independent LDW design variables (modality and activation timing) on driver performance safety indicators (e.g., frequency of lateral excursions and unintended departure events, and the magnitudes of these events). The sub-study will be conducted as a 2×3 factorial design with three LDW modalities and two LDW timing activation levels (for a total of six combinations). The LDW activation timing levels will be defined according to a previously conducted market assessment and vehicle characterization. At the halfway point, a member of the research team will switch the modality/timing combination. A remote experimenter tool will allow the experimenter to monitor the session and allow interfacing with the DAS. The total driving session duration for each participant will be approximately 4 hours, split into two sub-sessions. With orientation to the research vehicle and prescribed route, along with a 15-minute break at the halfway point, the total estimated time to complete this driving session is approximately 5 hours and 10 minutes. For up to 48 participants (16 respondents annually), this equates to a total of 248 burden hours (83 annual burden hours).

9. Session 2 Post-Route Questionnaire LDW

At the halfway point when the respondents take their 15-minute break, they will also complete the “post-route” questionnaire. This is estimated to take 10 minutes but is distinct from their break time. They will complete this same questionnaire after completing their second half of the drive. For up to 48 participants (16 respondents annually), this equates to a total of 16 burden hours (5 annual burden hours).

10. Session 2 Naturalistic Driving: LDW/LKA subset

Each participant from the second group (11 respondents annually) will complete the same prescribed drive but using the LDW/LKA factory vehicle rather than the LDW mockup vehicle. This experiment will address objective driver performance and subjective qualitative preferences under four system activation modes (none, LDW only, LKA only, and LDW with LKA). At the halfway point, a member of the research team will switch the modality/timing combination. A remote experimenter tool will allow the experimenter to monitor the session and allow interfacing with the DAS. The total driving session duration for each participant will be approximately 4 hours, split into two sub-sessions. Including orientation to the research vehicle and prescribed route, along with a 15-minute break at the halfway point, the total estimated time to complete this driving session is approximately 5 hours and 10 minutes. For up to 32 participants (11 respondents annually), this equates to a total of 165 burden hours (57 annual burden hours).

11. Session 2 Post-Route Questionnaire LDW/LKA

At the halfway point when respondents take their 15-minute break, they will also complete the “post-route” questionnaire. This is estimated to take 10 minutes but is distinct from their break time. They will complete this same questionnaire a second time after completing their second half of the drive. For up to 32 participants (11 respondents annually), this equates to a total of 11 burden hours (4 annual burden hours).

For ease in understanding the calculations for burden and opportunity cost, Table 1 details the study over the course of the three-year approval using the total number of respondents in the study.

Table 1: Total 3-year Burden Estimates by Information Collection

Information Collection	Number of Respondents	Frequency of Response	Time per Response (minutes)	Cost per Response	Burden Hours	Opportunity Cost
Recruitment Screener	340	1	15	$8.73	85	$2,968
Informed Consent	85	1	30	$17.46	43	$1,484
Vision-Hearing Form	80	1	5	$2.91	7	$233
Knowledge Experience Questionnaire	80	1	10	$5.82	13	$466
Session 1: Controlled Driving	80	1	100	$58.18	133	$4,654
Session 1 Post-Condition Questionnaire	80	12	5	$2.91	80	$2,794
Session 1 Post-Session Questionnaire	80	1	5	$2.91	7	$233
Session 2 Naturalistic Driving: LDW Subset	48	1	310	$180.37	248	$8,658
Session 2 Post-Route Questionnaire LDW	48	2	10	$5.82	16	$559
Session 2 Naturalistic Driving: LDW/LKA Subset	32	1	310	$180.37	165	$5,772
Session 2 Post-Route Questionnaire LDW/LKA	32	2	10	$5.82	11	$372
Total					808	$28,193

Table 2 summarizes the estimated annual burden hours for each of the study-related activities and forms, based on a 3-year period. All data in this table reflect the values in Table 1 divided by three. There may be some differences between tables due to rounding. The annual information will be entered into ROCIS.

Table 2: Annual Burden Estimates by Information Collection

Information Collection	Number of Respondents	Frequency of Response	Time per Response (minutes)	Cost per Response	Burden Hours	Opportunity Cost
Recruitment Screener	113	1	15	$8.73	28	$986
Informed Consent	28	1	30	$17.46	14	$489
Vision-Hearing Form	27	1	5	$2.91	2	$79
Knowledge Experience Questionnaire	27	1	10	$5.82	5	$157
Session 1: Controlled Driving	27	1	100	$58.18	45	$1,571
Session 1 Post-Condition Questionnaire	27	12	5	$2.91	27	$943
Session 1 Post-Session Questionnaire	27	1	5	$2.91	2	$79
Session 2 Naturalistic Driving: LDW Subset	16	1	310	$180.37	83	$2,886
Session 2 Post-Route Questionnaire LDW	16	2	10	$5.82	5	$186
Session 2 Naturalistic Driving: LDW/LKA Subset	11	1	310	$180.37	57	$1,984
Session 2 Post-Route Questionnaire LDW/LKA	11	2	10	$5.82	4	$128
Total					272	$9,488

13. Provide an estimate of the total annual cost to the respondents or record keepers resulting from the collection of information.

The only cost burdens respondents will incur are costs related to travel to and from the research location. The costs are minimal and are expected to be offset by the honorarium that will be provided to the research participants. More specifically, participants will be compensated for the time of their participation, only. NHTSA estimates that, on average, each of the participants will travel less than 15 miles one-way to the research location (30 miles round trip), for a total of 60 miles for the two study drive days. Using the IRS standard mileage rate of $0.67 per mile⁷, each respondent is expected to incur no more than $40.20 in transportation costs. Therefore, NHTSA estimates that the total costs to respondents will be no more than $3,216.

14. Provide estimates of the annualized cost to the Federal government. Provide a description of the method used to estimate cost, which should include quantification of hours, operational expenses (such as equipment, overhead, printing, and support staff), and any other expense that would not have been incurred without this collection of information.

The full costs of this information collection are included in a contract awarded to VTTI. The total cost for the entire 36-month project is $795,653, with an approximate annualized cost to the Federal government of $265,217. The project consists of two phases. Phase I began with a detailed literature review of previous studies related to LDW and LKA systems. This review provided critical information for the subsequent meta-analysis task, which includes a crash population analysis, market assessment, and system benefit analysis. Along with a characterization of current LDW and LKA technologies, information from Phase I will directly influence the Phase II evaluation of system performance and consumer acceptance. Phase II comprises the data collection effort described in this document, during which objective and subjective data will be captured using a group of volunteer participants who will be asked to drive test vehicles on a test track and on public roads. The task encompassing data collection will include the development of two test vehicles followed by assessments on the test track and prescribed drives on public roads.

Compensation

Participants in this study will be compensated for the opportunity cost for their time invested in the study. Participants will be compensated at a rate of $40 per hour for participation. Participants will be paid $140 after the first session and $220 following the second, for a full combined payment of $360. Should the participant choose to withdraw from the study, or the experimenter decides to end the session early, the participant will be compensated for time participated at the rate of $40/hour, rounded up to the nearest half hour. All participants will receive at least $40. Participant compensation was included in this project’s original budget.

15. Explain the reasons for any program changes or adjustments reported on the burden worksheet. If this is a new collection, the program change will be entire burden cost and number of burden hours reported in response to questions 12 and 13. If this is a renewal or reinstatement, the change is the difference between the new burden estimates and the burden estimates from the last OMB approval.

This is a new information collection. As such, it requires a program change to add the estimated total of 808 burden hours and $28,193 with an annual estimate of 272 burden hours and $9,488.

16. For collection of information whose results will be published, outline plans for tabulation and publication. Address any complex analytical techniques that will be used. Provide the time schedule for the entire project, including beginning and ending dates of the collection of information, completion of report, publication dates, and other actions as applicable.

NHTSA will develop a final report that presents the aggregate statistics and tabular results from the data collection effort, which will be disseminated on the agency website and through the National Transportation Library. Analysis will employ a variety of methods following proven statistical techniques, focusing on key quantitative and qualitative measures toward answering this project’s core research questions. We expect data collection to take place in the second half of 2025 to early 2026, and the report to be published in 2026. Individual data will not be identified in the report.

17. If seeking approval to not display the expiration date for OMB approval of the information collection, explain the reasons that display would be inappropriate.

NHTSA will display the expiration date for OMB approval.

18. Explain each exception to the certification statement identified in “certification for paperwork reduction act submissions.” The required certifications can be found at 5 CFR 1320.9.

There are no exceptions to the certification statement.

In accordance with the requirement at 5 CFR 1320.9(g), a statement similar to the following will be included on each information collection instrument.

Paperwork Reduction Act Statement: A Federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information displays a current valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Number for this information collection is 2127-XXXX. The information collected on this form is necessary to complete a study to examine the effectiveness of lateral control advanced driver assistance systems. We estimate that it will take approximately [specific to each form] minutes to complete this form. The information collected is voluntary. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to: Information Collection Clearance Officer, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave, S.E., Room W45-205, Washington, DC, 20590.

1 Aukema, A., Berman, K., Gaydos, T., Sienknecht, T., Chen, C.-L., Wiacek, C., Czapp, T., & St. Lawrence, S. (2023) Real-World Effectiveness of Model Year 2015-2020 Advanced Driver Assistance Systems. 27th International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles, Paper Number 23-0170.

2 Flannagan, C. & Leslie, A. (2020). Crash Avoidance Technology Evaluation Using Real-World Crash Data (No. DOT HS812 841). National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

3 Flannagan, C., LeBlanc, D., Bogard, S., Nobukawa, K., Narayanaswamy, P., Leslie, A., Kiefer, R., Marchione, M., Beck, C., & Lobes, K. (2016). Large-scale field test of forward collision alert and lane departure warning systems (No. DOT HS 812 247).]. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. https://trid.trb.org/view/1415844

4 Monticello, M. (2019, June 25). Car safety systems that could save your life. Consumer Reports. https://www.consumerreports.org/automotive-technology/car-safety-systems-that-could-save-your-life/

 

5 May 2024, Employment and Earnings Summary Table B, Hours and Earnings All Employees, Total Private Average Hourly Earnings, available https://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/ceseesummary.htm (accessed June 24, 2024)

6 May 2024, Employment and Earnings Summary Table B, Hours and Earnings All Employees, Total Private Average Hourly Earnings, available https://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/ceseesummary.htm (accessed June 24, 2024)

7 From Internal Revenue Service’s 2024 standard mileage rates for self-employed and business. https://www.irs.gov/tax-professionals/standard-mileage-rates, last accessed April 26, 2024.