Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 107 / Friday, June 2, 2000 / Notices 35419

variables and may be recognized many times

during a single day, or sporadically during

the course of one or several months.

212A

The 212A module is also part of the signal

lighting circuits within Electro Code 4 and

Electro Code 4 Plus equipment. AC signals

from the processor modules are combined on

the 212A to provide the excitation voltages

to the 211 converter modules. It has been

recognized that several of the electrolytic

capacitors on the 212A modules have failed,

resulting in symmetry distortion of the AC

signal passed to the 211 modules. This

distortion may exaggerate the noise condition

as described with the 211S and 211SRP

above.

Harmon further stated that ‘‘[on the

211S and 211SRP modules, several

components in addition to the resistor

described above, will be replaced and

added to the base design. This upgrade

offer applies only to 211S and 211SRP

converter modules * * * manufactured

between March 1994 and March 1998

* * * ’’

Recommendation

In recognition of the need to assure

safe reliable railroad signal operations,

FRA strongly recommends that:

1. Each railroad having a signal

system which uses any ‘‘Electro Code 4’’

or ‘‘Electro Code 4 Plus’’ Intermediate

signal unit immediately identify each

211S, 211SRP, and 212A module within

their signal system.

2. Each railroad replace or upgrade

every 211S, 211SRP, or 212A module

within their signal system as soon as

possible.

3. Each railroad having 211S, 211SRP,

or 212A modules contact Harmon

Industries Riverside Operations,

Attention Repair and Return, 7337

Central Avenue, Riverside, California

92504, phone no.: 800–854–4752 for

further information pertaining to

upgrades.

Issued in Washington, DC on May 25,

2000.

George Gavalla,

Associate Administrator for Safety.

[FR Doc. 00–13838 Filed 6–1–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–06–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA–2000–7268]

Denial of Petition for Import Eligibility

Decision

This notice sets forth the reasons for

the denial of a petition submitted to the

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration (NHTSA) under 49

U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A). The petition,

which was submitted by Champagne

Imports, Inc. of Lansdale, Pennsylvania

(‘‘Champagne’’), a registered importer of

motor vehicles, requested NHTSA to

decide that 1995–1996 Audi Cabriolet

passenger cars that were not originally

manufactured to comply with all

applicable Federal motor vehicle safety

standards are eligible for importation

into the United States. In the petition,

Champagne contended that these

vehicles are eligible for importation on

the basis that (1) they are substantially

similar to vehicles that were originally

manufactured for importation into and

sale in the United States and that were

certified by their manufacturer as

complying with the safety standards

(the U.S. certified version of the 1995–

1996 Audi Cabriolet), and (2) they are

capable of being readily altered to

conform to the standards.

NHTSA published a notice in the

Federal Register on December 13, 1999

(64 FR 69583) that contained a thorough

description of the petition, and solicited

public comments upon it. One comment

was received in response to the notice,

from Volkswagen of America, Inc.

(‘‘Volkswagen’’), the United States

representative of Audi AG, the vehicle’s

manufacturer. In this comment,

Volkswagen contended that non-U.S.

certified 1995–1996 Audi Cabriolet

passenger cars are ineligible for

importation because they are not

substantially similar to vehicles that

were originally manufactured and

certified for sale in the United States

and are not capable of being readily

altered to conform to the standards.

Specifically, Volkswagen observed that

the non-U.S. certified 1995–1996 Audi

Cabriolet passenger cars that are the

subject of the petition are equipped with

a 2.6 liter V6 engine rated at 150 hp

with front wheel drive and a manual 5-

speed transmission. Volkswagen stated

that the only engine installed on 1995–

1996 Audi Cabriolet passenger cars

certified for the U.S. market was a 2.8

liter V6 rated at 172 hp. As a

consequence, Volkswagen asserted that

the engine components of the non-U.S.

certified 1995–1996 Audi Cabriolet were

not certified to any of the Federal motor

vehicle safety standards containing

requirements that relate to engines.

Volkswagen identified those standards

as including Standard Nos. 103

Windshield Defrosting and Defogging

Systems, 105 Hydraulic Brake Systems,

124 Accelerator Control Systems, and

insofar as they require the dynamic

crash testing of a vehicle, Standard Nos.

208 Occupant Crash Protection, 212

Windshield Mounting, 219 Windshield

Zone Intrusion, and 301 Fuel System

Integrity. Volkswagen additionally

noted that the petitioner erroneously

claimed that non-U.S. certified 1995–

1996 Audi Cabriolet passenger cars

comply with the Bumper Standard

found at 49 CFR Part 581. Volkswagen

observed that the bumper components

on these vehicles differ from those

installed on U.S. certified models.

NHTSA accorded Champagne an

opportunity to respond to Volkswagen’s

comments. In its response, Champagne

did not address any of the issues raised

by Volkswagen, and requested that its

petition be withdrawn. Because it had

already solicited public comments on

the petition, NHTSA could not accede

to this request.

In light of Volkswagen’s comments,

NHTSA has concluded that the petition

does not clearly demonstrate that nonU.S. certified 1995–1996 Audi Cabriolet

passenger cars are eligible for

importation. The petition must therefore

be denied under 49 CFR 593.7(e).

In accordance with 49 U.S.C.

30141(b)(1), NHTSA will not consider a

new import eligibility petition covering

this vehicle until at least three months

from the date of this notice.

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A) and

(b)(1); 49 CFR 593.7; delegations of authority

at 49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8.

Issued on: May 30, 2000.

Marilynne Jacobs,

Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.

[FR Doc. 00–13886 Filed 6–1–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Surface Transportation Board

[STB Docket No. AB–33 (Sub–No. 153X)]

Union Pacific Railroad Company—

Abandonment Exemption—in Monroe

County, IA

On May 15, 2000, Union Pacific

Railroad Company (UP), filed with the

Surface Transportation Board (Board) a

petition under 49 U.S.C. 10502 for

exemption from the provisions of 49

U.S.C. 10903–10905 to abandon a line of

railroad known as the Oskaloosa

Subdivision, extending between

milepost 312.1 near Eddyville and

milepost 322.9 near Maxon, a distance

of 10.8 miles in Monroe County, IA. The

line traverses U.S. Postal Service Zip

Codes 52531 and 52553, and includes

the non-agency stations of Bridgeport

(milepost 313) and Maxon (milepost

322.9).

35420 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 107 / Friday, June 2, 2000 / Notices

In addition to an exemption from 49

U.S.C. 10903, petitioner seeks

exemption from 49 U.S.C. 10904 (offer

of financial assistance procedures) and

49 U.S.C. 10905 (public use conditions).

In support, UP contends that exemption

from these provisions is necessary to

permit its conveyance to the sole

shipper on the line, Cargill, Inc.

(Cargill), of a segment of the line

between mileposts 312.1 and 315 for

construction of a plant switching

facility. The switching operation is

necessary for construction by Cargill of

a private rail line that will run south

from the plant to The Burlington

Northern and Santa Fe Railway

Company’s main line. UP also requests

expedited consideration of the

exemption petition, including

effectiveness of the exemption on

service of the final decision. UP avers

that expedited action is necessary here

because Cargill urgently needs the rightof-way. These requests will be

addressed in the final decision.

The line does not contain federally

granted rights-of-way. Any

documentation in UP’s possession will

be made available promptly to those

requesting it.

The interest of railroad employees

will be protected by the conditions set

forth in Oregon Short Line R. Co.—

Abandonment—Goshen, 360 I.C.C. 91

(1979).

By issuance of this notice, the Board

is instituting an exemption proceeding

pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 10502(b). A final

decision will be issued by September 1,

2000.

Any offer of financial assistance

(OFA) under 49 CFR 1152.27(b)(2) will

be due no later than 10 days after

service of a decision granting the

petition for exemption. Each offer must

be accompanied by a $1,000 filing fee.

See 49 CFR 1002.2(f)(25).

All interested persons should be

aware that, following abandonment of

rail service and salvage of the line, the

line may be suitable for other public

use, including interim trail use. Any

request for a public use condition under

49 CFR 1152.28 or for trail use/rail

banking under 49 CFR 1152.29 will be

due no later than June 22, 2000. Each

trail use request must be accompanied

by a $150 filing fee. See 49 CFR

1002.2(f)(27).

All filings in response to this notice

must refer to STB Docket No. AB–33

(Sub-No. 153X) and must be sent to: (1)

Surface Transportation Board, Office of

the Secretary, Case Control Unit, 1925 K

Street, NW, Washington, DC 20423–

0001, and (2) James P. Gatlin, 1416

Dodge Street, Room 830, Omaha, NE

68179–0830. Replies to the UP petition

are due on or before June 22, 2000.

Persons seeking further information

concerning abandonment procedures

may contact the Board’s Office of Public

Services at (202) 565–1592 or refer to

the full abandonment or discontinuance

regulations at 49 CFR part 1152.

Questions concerning environmental

issues may be directed to the Board’s

Section of Environmental Analysis

(SEA) at (202) 565–1545. [TDD for the

hearing impaired is available at 1–800–

877–8339.]

An environmental assessment (EA) (or

environmental impact statement (EIS), if

necessary) prepared by SEA will be

served upon all parties of record and

upon any agencies or other persons who

commented during its preparation.

Other interested persons may contact

SEA to obtain a copy of the EA (or EIS).

EAs in these abandonment proceedings

normally will be made available within

60 days of the filing of the petition. The

deadline for submission of comments on

the EA will generally be within 30 days

of its service.

Board decisions and notices are

available on our website at

‘‘WWW.STB.DOT.GOV.’’

Decided: May 25, 2000.

By the Board, David M. Konschnik, Director,

Office of Proceedings.

Vernon A. Williams,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00–13856 Filed 6–1–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4915–00–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Submission for OMB Review;

Comment Request

May 26, 2000.

The Department of the Treasury has

submitted the following public

information collection requirement(s) to

OMB for review and clearance under the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,

Public Law 104–13. Copies of the

submission(s) may be obtained by

calling the Treasury Bureau Clearance

Officer listed. Comments regarding this

information collection should be

addressed to the OMB reviewer listed

and to the Treasury Department

Clearance Officer, Department of the

Treasury, Room 2110, 1425 New York

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20220.

DATES: Written comments should be

received on or before July 3, 2000, to be

assured of consideration.

Departmental Offices/Office of

International Investment

OMB Number: 1505–0121.

Form Number: None.

Type of Review: Extension.

Title: Regulations Pertaining to

Mergers, Acquisitions and Takeovers by

Foreign Persons.

Description: Treasury disseminates to

other agencies that are members of the

Committee on Foreign Investment in the

United States (CFIUS) information

collected under the regulations from

parties involved in a foreign acquisition

of a U.S. company in order to do a

national security analysis of the

acquisition.

Respondents: Business or other forprofit.

Estimated Number of Respondents:

100.

Estimated Burden Hours Per

Respondent: 60 hours.

Frequency of Response: On occasion.

Estimated Total Reporting Burden:

6,000 hours.

Clearance Officer: Lois K. Holland,

(202) 622–1563, Departmental Offices,

Room 2110, 1425 New York Avenue,

N.W., Washington, DC 20220.

OMB Reviewer: Alexander T. Hunt,

(202) 395–7860, Office of Management

and Budget, Room 10202, New

Executive Office Building, Washington,

DC 20503.

Lois K. Holland,

Departmental Reports Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 00–13877 Filed 6–1–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4810–25–U

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of the Comptroller of the

Currency

[Docket No. 00–12]

Notice of Request for Preemption

Determination

AGENCY: Office of the Comptroller of the

Currency, Treasury.

ACTION: Notice and request for comment.

SUMMARY: The Office of the Comptroller

of the Currency (OCC) is publishing for

comment a written request for the OCC’s

determination of whether Federal law

preempts certain provisions of the West

Virginia Insurance Sales Consumer

Protection Act (West Virginia Law). The

purpose of this notice and request for

comment is to provide interested

persons with an opportunity to submit

comments prior to the OCC’s issuance of

any final opinion in this matter.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before July 3, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent to

the Communications Division, Office of

the Comptroller of the Currency, 250 E