31628 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 97 / Thursday, May 18, 2000 / Notices

CFR section Respondent

universe

Total annual

responses

Average time

per response

(hours)

Total annual

burden hours

Total annual

burden cost

Requests for Approval of Marking Devices & Signed

Certification by Chief Operating Officer.

685 railroads ..... 2 requests ........ 4 8 $280

Recordkeeping—Requests for Marking Devices ........... 685 railroads ..... 2 records .......... .10 .20 7

Recordkeeping—Detailed Test Records ....................... 685 railroads ..... 1 test record ..... 20 20 700

Total Responses: 5.

Estimated Total Annual Burden: 28.2 hours.

Status: Regular Review.

Title: Certification of Glazing Materials.

OMB Control Number: 2130–0525.

Abstract: The collection of information is set forth under 49 CFR part 223 which requires the certification and

permanent marking of glazing materials by the manufacturer along with the responsibility of the manufacturer to make

available test verification data to railroads and FRA upon request.

Affected Public: Businesses.

Respondent Universe: 5 manufacturers.

Frequency of Submission: On occasion.

Reporting Burden:

CFR section

Respondent

universe

(manufacturers)

Total annual

responses

Average time

per response

Total annual

burden hours

Total annual

burden cost

Requests—Glazing Certification Info ............................. 5 75 requests ...... 15 minutes ........ 19 $475

Preparing/Recording Glazing Marking Information ........ 5 25,000 pieces ... .0021 minutes ... 52 1,300

Certification Test ............................................................ 5 1 test ................ 14 hours ........... 14 1,120

Total Responses: 76.

Estimated Total Annual Burden: 85

hours.

Status: Regular Review.

Pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 3507(a) and 5

CFR 1320.5(b), 1320.8(b)(3)(vi), FRA

informs all interested parties that it may

not conduct or sponsor, and a

respondent is not required to respond

to, a collection of information unless it

displays a currently valid OMB control

number.

Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501–3520.

Issued in Washington, D.C. on May 12,

2000.

Margaret B. Reid,

Acting Director, Office of Information

Technology and Support Systems, Federal

Railroad Administration.

[FR Doc. 00–12568 Filed 5–17–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–06–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

Petition for Waiver of Compliance

In accordance with Part 211 of Title

49 of the Code of Federal Regulations

(CFR), notice is hereby given that the

Federal Railroad Administration (FRA)

received a request for a waiver of

compliance with certain requirements of

its safety standards. The individual

petition is described below, including

the party seeking relief, the regulatory

provisions involved, the nature of the

relief being requested, and the

petitioner’s arguments in favor of relief.

Alaska Railroad Corporation

[Docket Number FRA–2000–7350]

The Alaska Railroad Corporation

(ARR) seeks a temporary waiver of

compliance with a provision of the

Passenger Equipment Safety Standards

(49 CFR part 238). ARR has been

transporting full-length dome cars

owned by Westours Motorcoaches, Inc.

since 1987. ARR states that the cars

currently have two emergency exits on

each side of the car located in the

staggered hallways (a total of four

emergency exits per car located midway between the upper main level and

a small lower level). Westours

Motorcoaches, Inc. determined that the

placement of the current emergency

exits did not comply with 49 CFR

238.113(a) which addresses the number

and location of emergency exits.

Accordingly, Westours contracted for

retrofit of existing dome cars to comply

with section 238.1139(a). Although

delivery of compliant emergency

windows was originally scheduled for

April 1, 2000, due to technical

problems, delivery may not be

accomplished until as late as August 1,

2000.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 97 / Thursday, May 18, 2000 / Notices 31629

ARR is therefore requesting a

temporary waiver from section

238.113(a) until August 1, 2000 to

permit it to use Westours Motorcoaches,

Inc. dome cars in revenue and nonrevenue service until that time.

Interested parties are invited to

participate in these proceedings by

submitting written views, data, or

comments. FRA does not anticipate

scheduling a public hearing in

connection with this proceeding since

the facts do not appear to warrant a

hearing. If any interested party desires

an opportunity for oral comment, they

should notify FRA, in writing, before

the end of the comment period and

specify the basis for their request.

All communications concerning this

proceeding should identify the

appropriate docket number (e.g. Docket

No. FRA–2000–7350) and must be

submitted to the Docket Clerk, DOT

Docket Management Facility, Room PL–

401 (Plaza Level), 400 7th Street, SW,

Washington, DC 20590.

Communications received within 15

days of the date of this notice will be

considered by FRA before final action is

taken. Comments received after that

date will be considered as far as

practicable. All written communications

concerning this proceeding are available

for examination during regular business

hours (9:00 am—5:00 pm) at the above

facility.

All documents in the public docket

are also available for inspection and

copying on the internet at the docket

facility’s web site at http://dms.dot.gov.

Issued in Washington, D.C. on May 11,

2000.

Grady C. Cothen, Jr.,

Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety

Standards and Program Development.

[FR Doc. 00–12567 Filed 5–17–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–06–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA 2000–7354; Notice 1]

Honda Motor Co., Ltd.; Receipt of

Application for Temporary Exemption

From Federal Motor Vehicle Safety

Standard No. 123

Honda Motor Co. Ltd. (‘‘Honda’’), a

Japanese corporation, through American

Honda Motor Co., Inc., of Torrance,

California, has applied for a temporary

exemption of two years from a

requirement of S5.2.1 (Table 1) of

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard

No. 123 Motorcycle Controls and

Displays. The basis of the request is that

‘‘compliance with the standard would

prevent the manufacturer from selling a

motor vehicle with an overall safety

level at least equal to the overall safety

level of nonexempt vehicles,’’ 49 U.S.C.

30113(b)(3)(B)(iv).

We are publishing this notice of

receipt of an application in accordance

with the requirements of 49 U.S.C.

30113(b)(2). This action does not

represent any judgment of the agency on

the merits of the application.

Honda has applied on behalf of its

NSS250 motor scooters. The scooters are

defined as ‘‘motorcycles’’ for purposes

of compliance with the Federal motor

vehicle safety standards.

If a motorcycle is produced with rear

wheel brakes, S5.2.1 of Standard No.

123 requires that the brakes be operable

through the right foot control (the left

handlebar is permissible only for a

motor driven cycle (Item 11, Table 1),

i.e., a motorcycle with a motor that

produces 5 brake horsepower or less).

Honda petitions that it be allowed to

use the left handlebar as the control for

the rear brakes of its NSS250, which is

a motorcycle and not a motor driven

cycle. The model features an automatic

transmission that eliminates the lefthand clutch lever as well as any left-foot

gearshift lever. This leaves the left hand

of the rider free to operate a brake lever.

In Honda’s opinion, ‘‘removal of the

left-handlebar clutch lever, left-footcontrolled gearshift lever and right-footcontrolled rear brake pedal result in

simpler operation.’’ Honda points out

that NHTSA exempted three other

motorcycle manufacturers from this

requirement of S5.2.1. in 1999 (Aprilia,

64 FR 44262; Vectrix, 64 FR 45585; and

Italjet, 64 FR 58127).

Honda argues that the overall level of

safety of the scooters equals or exceeds

that of a motorcycle that complies with

the brake control location requirement

of Standard No. 123. Unlike the other

exempted motorcycles, the NSS250 is

equipped with a ‘‘combined brake

system’’ which ‘‘provides single-point,

front- and rear-wheel braking action.’’

The vehicle meets the braking

performance requirements ‘‘of both

FMVSS 122 and ECE78.’’ The company

submitted test results demonstrating

that the braking performance of the

NSS250 with its combined brake system

is better than that of a scooter without

the combined brake system. For the

second effectiveness test, for example,

the NSS250 stopped in shorter distances

than a Honda model equipped with a

foot brake, that is to say, from a

maximum speed of 65.4 mph in 165 feet

(compared with 178 feet), and, from 30

mph, in 38 feet (compared with 40 feet).

Honda has developed the NSS250 for

the world market. In Europe, Japan, and

other Asian countries, scooters are

equipped with handlebar-mounted front

and rear brakes. Absent an exemption,

then, Honda will be unable to sell the

NSS250 in the United States. The cost

to conform the NSS250 to comply with

Standard No. 123 ‘‘would add

considerable cost to the product’’ and

result in a motorcycle that would not be

competitive.

Honda will not sell more than 2,500

scooters a year while an exemption is in

effect. It believes that an exemption

would be in the public interest and

consistent with the objectives of traffic

safety because ‘‘the level of safety is

equal to similar vehicles certified under

FMVSS No. 123.’’

You may submit comments on the

application described above. Comments

should refer to the docket number and

the notice number, and be submitted to:

Docket Management, Room PL–401, 400

Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC

20590. You should send at least two

copies.

We shall consider all comments

received before the close of business on

the comment closing date indicated

below. Comments will be available for

examination in the docket at the above

address both before and after that date.

The Docket Room is open from 10:00

a.m. until 5:00 p.m. To the extent

possible, comments filed after the

closing date will also be considered.

We shall publish a notice of final

action on the application pursuant to

the authority indicated below.

Comment closing date: June 19, 2000.

(49 U.S.C. 30113; delegations of authority at

49 CFR 1.50. and 501.8)

Issued on May 11, 2000.

Stephen R. Kratzke,

Associate Administrator for Safety

Performance Standards.

[FR Doc. 00–12556 Filed 5–17–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P