Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 147 / Thursday, July 31, 1997 / Notices 41127

issues. This meeting will be held on

August 19, 1997 at 9:30 a.m. at the

Helicopter Association International,

1635 Prince Street, Alexandria, VA

22314.

The agenda for this meeting will

include: (1) A status report on the Part

103 (Ultralight Vehicles) Working

Group’s NPRM, ‘‘Sport Pilot

Certification Requirements;’’ (2) a status

report on the IFR Fuel Requirements/

Destination and Alternate Weather

Minimums Working Group’s NPRM,

‘‘Flight Plan Requirements for

Helicopter Operations Under Instrument

Flight Rules;’’ (3) a discussion of

overflights of national parks; (4) and the

FAA’s August 4, 1997, implementation

of revisions to 14 CFR part 61.

Attendance is open to the interested

public but may be limited to the space

available. The public must make

arrangements in advance to present oral

statements at the meeting or may

present written statements to the

committee at any time. In addition, sign

and oral interpretation can be made

available at the meeting, as well as an

assistive listening device, if requested

10 calendar days before the meeting.

Arrangements may be made by

contacting the person listed under the

heading FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTRACT.

Issued in Washington, DC on July 24, 1997.

Louis C. Cusimano,

Assistant Executive Director for General

Aviation Operations, Aviation Rulemaking

Advisory Committee.

[FR Doc. 97–20076 Filed 7–30–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Maritime Administration

[Docket No. M–038]

Information Collection Available for

Public Comments and

Recommendations

ACTION: Notice and request for

comments.

SUMMARY: In accordance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this

notice announces the Maritime

Administration’s (MARAD’s) intentions

to request extension of approval for

three years of a currently approved

information collection.

DATES: Comments should be submitted

on or before September 29, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Erhard W. Koehler, Division of Ship

Maintenance and Repair, Maritime

Administration, MAR–611, Room 2119,

400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington,

DC 20590. Telephone 202–366–2631 or

FAX 202–366–3954. Copies of this

collection can also be obtained from that

office.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Title of Collection: Maintenance and

Repair Cumulative Summary.

Type of Request: Extension of

currently approved information

collection.

OMB Control Number: 2133–0007.

Form Number: MA–140.

Expiration Date of Approval: March

31, 1998.

Summary of Collection of

Information: The collection consists of

form MA–140 to which are attached

invoices and other supporting

documents for expenses claimed for

subsidy. Subidized operators submit

form MA–140 to the appropriate

MARAD region office for review within

60 days of the termination of a

subsidized voyage.

Need and Use of the Information: The

collected information is necessary to

perform the reviews required in order to

permit payment of Maintenance and

Repair subsidy.

Description of Respondents:

Subsidized ship operators must submit

the necessary paperwork to determine

qualification for subsidy.

Annual Responses: 100.

Annual Burden: 1200 hours.

Comments: Send all comments

regarding this information collection to

Joel C. Richard, Department of

Transportation, Maritime

Administration, MAR–120, Room 7210,

400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington,

DC 20590. Send comments regarding

whether this information collection is

necessary for proper performance of the

function of the agency and will have

practical utility, accuracy of the burden

estimates, ways to minimize this

burden, and ways to enhance quality,

utility, and clarity of the information to

be collected.

By Order of the Maritime Administrator.

Dated: July 25, 1997.

Joel C. Richard,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–20117 Filed 7–30–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–81–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

[Docket No. 97–43; Notice 1]

American Honda Motor Company, Inc.;

Receipt of Application for Temporary

Exemption From Federal Motor Vehicle

Safety Standard No. 122

American Honda Motor Co., Inc., of

Torrance, California (‘‘Honda’’), has

applied for a temporary exemption from

the fade and water recovery

requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle

Safety Standard No. 122 Motorcycle

Brake Systems. The basis of the

application is that an exemption would

make easier the development or field

evaluation of a new motor vehicle safety

feature providing a safety level at least

equal to the safety level of the standard.

This notice of receipt of an

application is published in accordance

with the requirements of 49 U.S.C.

30113(b)(2) and does not represent any

judgment of the agency on the merits of

the application.

Honda seeks an exemption of one year

for its 1998 CBR1100XX motorcycle

‘‘from the requirement of the minimum

hand-lever force of five pounds in the

base line check for the fade and water

recovery tests.’’ It wishes to evaluate the

marketability of an ‘‘improved’’

motorcycle brake system setting which

is currently applied to the model sold in

Europe. The difference in setting is

limited to a softer master cylinder return

spring in the European version. Using

the softer spring results in a ‘‘more

predictable (linear) feeling during initial

brake lever application.’’ Although ‘‘the

change allows a more predictable rise in

brake gain, the on-set of braking occurs

at lever forces slightly below the five

pound minimum’’ specified in Standard

No. 122. Honda considers that

motorcycle brake systems have

continued to evolve and improve since

Standard No. 122 was adopted in 1972,

and that one area of improvement is

brake lever force which has gradually

been reduced. However, the five-pound

minimum specification ‘‘is preventing

further development and improvement’’

of brake system characteristics. This

limit, when applied to the CBR1100XX

‘‘results in an imprecise feeling when

the rider applies low-level front brake

lever inputs.’’

The machine is equipped with

Honda’s Linked Brake System (LBS)

which is designed to engage both front

and rear brakes when either the front

brake lever or the rear brake pedal is

used. The LBS differs from other
41128 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 147 / Thursday, July 31, 1997 / Notices

integrated systems in that it allows the

rider to choose which wheel gets the

majority of braking force, depending on

which brake control the rider uses.

According to Honda, the overall

braking performance remains

unchanged from a conforming

motorcycle. If the CBR1100XX is

exempted it will meet ‘‘the stopping

distance requirement but at lever forces

slightly below the minimum.’’

Specifically, Honda asks for relief

from the first sentence of S6.10 Brake

application forces, which reads:

‘‘Except for the requirements of the

fifth recovery stop in S5.4.3 and S5.7.2

(S7.6.3 and S7.10.2) the hand lever force

is not less than five and not more than

55 pounds and the foot pedal force is

not less than 10 and not more than 90

pounds.’’

Upon review of this paragraph,

NHTSA has determined that granting

Honda’s petition would require relief

from different provisions of Standard

No. 122, although S6.10 relates to them.

Paragraph S6 only sets forth the test

conditions under which a motorcycle

must meet the performance

requirements of S5. A motorcycle

manufacturer certifies compliance with

the performance requirements of S5 on

the basis of tests conducted according to

the conditions of S6 and in the manner

specified by S7. In short, NHTSA

believes that granting Honda’s petition

would require relief from the

performance requirements of S5 that are

based upon the lever actuation force test

conditions of S6.10 as used in the test

procedures of S7.

These relate to the baseline checks

under which performance is judged for

the service brake system fade and fade

recovery tests (S5.4), and for the water

recovery tests (S5.7). According to the

test procedures of S7, the baseline check

stops for fade(S7.6.1) and water

recovery (S7.10.1) are to be made at 10

to 11 feet per second per second (fpsps)

per stop. The fade recovery test (S7.6.3)

also specifies stops at 10 to 11 fpsps.

Test data submitted by Honda with its

application show that, using a hand

lever force of 2.3 kg (5.1 pounds), the

deceleration for these stops is 3.05 to

3.35 meters per second per second, or

10.0 to 11.0 fpsps. This does not mean

that Honda cannot comply under the

strict parameters of the standard, but the

system is designed for responsive

performance when a hand lever force of

less than five pounds is used. For these

reasons, NHTSA interprets Honda’s

application as requesting relief from

S5.4.2, S5.4.3, and S5.7.2.

Honda argues that granting an

exemption would be in the public

interest and consistent with objectives

of traffic safety because it ‘‘should

improve a rider’s ability to precisely

modulate the brake force at low-level

brake lever input forces. Improving the

predictability, even at very low-level

brake lever input, increases the rider’s

confidence in the motorcycle’s brake

system.’’

Interested persons are invited to

submit comments on the application

described above. Comments should refer

to the docket number and the notice

number, and be submitted to: Docket

Section, National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration, room 5109, 400

Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC

20590. It is requested but not required

that 10 copies be submitted.

All comments received before the

close of business on the comment

closing date indicated below will be

considered, and will be available for

examination in the docket at the above

address both before and after that date.

To the extent possible, comments filed

after the closing date will also be

considered. Notice of final action on the

application will be published in the

Federal Register pursuant to the

authority indicated below.

Comment closing date: September 2,

1997.

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

at 49 CFR 1.50. and 501.8.)

Issued on July 24, 1997.

L. Robert Shelton,

Associate Administrator for Safety

Performance Standards.

[FR Doc. 97–20092 Filed 7–30–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 49l0–59–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Research and Special Programs

Administration

Office of Hazardous Materials Safety;

Notice of Delays in Processing of

Exemption Applications

AGENCY: Research and Special Programs

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: List of Applications Delayed

more than 180 days.

SUMMARY: In accordance with the

requirements of 49 U.S.C. 5117(c), RSPA

is publishing the following list of

exemption applications that have been

in process for 180 days or more. The

reason(s) for delay and the expected

completion date for action on each

application is provided in association

with each identified application.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: J.

Suzanne Hedgepeth, Director, Office of

Hazardous Materials, Exemptions and

Approvals, Research and Special

Programs Administration, U.S.

Department of Transportation, 400

Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC

20590–0001, (202) 366–4535.

Key to ‘‘Reasons for Delay’’

1. Awaiting additional information

from applicant.

2. Extensive public comment under

review.

3. Application is technically very

complex and is of significant impact or

precedent-setting and requires extensive

analysis.

4. Staff review delayed by other

priority issues or volume of exemption

applications.

Meaning of Application Number

Suffixes

N—New application.

M—Modificaiton request.

PM—Party to application with

modification request.

Issued in Washington, DC, on July 25,

1997.

J. Suzanne Hedgepeth,

Director, Office of Hazardous Materials,

Exemptions and Approvals.

NEW EXEMPTION APPLICATIONS

Application No. Applicant Reason for

delay

Estimated date of

completion

10581–N ................ Luxfer UK Limited, Nottingham, England ........................................................................... 4 09/30/1977

11193–N ................ U.S. Department of Defense, Fall Church, VA .................................................................. 4 09/30/1977

11232–N ................ State of Alaska Department of Transportation, Juneau, AK ............................................. 4 09/30/1977

11409–N ................ Pure Solve, Inc., Irving, TX ................................................................................................ 1 08/29/1977

11442–N ................ Union Tank Car Co., East Chicago, IN .............................................................................. 4 09/30/1977

11443–N ................ Hercules Inc., Wilmington, DE ........................................................................................... 4 08/29/1977

11465–N ................ Monsanto Co., St. Louis, MO ............................................................................................. 4 09/30/1977

11511–N ................ Brenner Tank Inc., Fond du lac, WI ................................................................................... 4 09/30/1977