Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Notices 54499

Estimated charge expiration date:

October 1, 1998.

Estimated total net PFC revenue:

$2,506,162.

Brief description of project.

Construct Two Remote Parking Aprons

Acquire Snow Removal Equipment

Acquire Snow Removal Equipment

Storage Building

Class or classes of air carriers which

the public agency has requested not be

required to collect PFCs: On demand

Air Taxi/Commercial Operators (ATCO).

Any person may inspect the

application in person at the FAA office

listed above under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT.

In addition, any person may, upon

request, inspect the application, notice

and other documents germane to the

application in person at the Manchester

Airport, One Airport Road, Suite 300,

Manchester, New Hampshire 03103.

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on

October 9, 1997.

Vincent A. Scarano,

Manager, Airports Division, New England

Region.

[FR Doc. 97–27684 Filed 10–17–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

[Docket No. 97–056; Notice 1]

Reports, Forms, and Recordkeeping

Requirements

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.

ACTION: Request for public comment on

proposed collections of information.

SUMMARY: Before a Federal agency can

collect certain information from the

public, it must receive approval from

the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB). Under new procedures

established by the Paperwork Reduction

Act of 1995, before seeking OMB

approval, Federal agencies must solicit

public comment on proposed

collections of information, including

extensions and reinstatements of

previously approved collections.

This document describes four

collections of information for which

NHTSA intends to seek OMB approval.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before December 19, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Comments must refer to the

docket and notice numbers cited at the

beginning of this notice and be

submitted to Docket Section, Room

5109, NHTSA, 400 Seventh St. S.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20590. Please identify

the proposed collection of information

for which a comment is provided, by

referencing its OMB Clearance Number.

It is requested, but not required, that 1

original plus 2 copies of the comments

be provided. The Docket Section is open

on weekdays from 9:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Complete copies of each request for

collection of information may be

obtained at no charge from Mr. Ed

Kosek, NHTSA Information Collection

Clearance Officer, NHTSA, 400 Seventh

Street, S.W., Room 6123, Washington,

D.C. 20590. Mr. Kosek’s telephone

number is (202) 366–2589. Please

identify the relevant collection of

information by referring to its OMB

Clearance Number.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,

before an agency submits a proposed

collection of information to OMB for

approval, it must publish a document in

the Federal Register providing a 60-day

comment period and otherwise consult

with members of the public and affected

agencies concerning each proposed

collection of information. The OMB has

promulgated regulations describing

what must be included in such a

document. Under OMB’s regulations (at

5 CFR 1320.8(d)), an agency must ask

for public comment on the following:

(i) Whether the proposed collection of

information is necessary for the proper

performance of the functions of the

agency, including whether the

information will have practical utility;

(ii) The accuracy of the agency’s

estimate of the burden of the proposed

collection of information, including the

validity of the methodology and

assumptions used;

(iii) How to enhance the quality,

utility, and clarity of the information to

be collected; and

(iv) How to minimize the burden of

the collection of information on those

who are to respond, including the use

of appropriate automated, electronic,

mechanical, or other technological

collection techniques or other forms of

information technology, e.g., permitting

electronic submission of responses.

In compliance with these

requirements, NHTSA asks public

comment on the following four

proposed collections of information.

Labeling of Retroreflective Materials for

Heavy Trailer Conspicuity, 49 CFR

571.108

Type of Request—Reinstatement of

clearance.

OMB Clearance Number—2127–0569.

Form Number—This collection of

information uses no standard forms.

Requested Expiration Date of

Approval—Three years from date of

approval.

Summary of the Collection of

Information—The permanent marking

of the letters ‘‘DOT–C2’’, ‘‘DOT–C3’’ or

‘‘DOT–C4’’ at least 3mm high at regular

intervals on retroreflective sheeting

material is the information collection.

Description of the Need for the

Information and Proposed Use of the

Information—Federal Motor Vehicle

Safety Standard No. 108, ‘‘Lamps,

Reflective Devices, and Associated

Equipment,’’ specifies requirements for

vehicle lighting for the purposes of

reducing traffic accidents and their

tragic results by providing adequate

roadway illumination, improved vehicle

conspicuity, appropriate information

transmission through signal lamps, in

both day, night, and other conditions of

reduced visibility. For certification and

identification purposes, the Standard

requires the permanent marking of the

letters ‘‘DOT–C2’’, ‘‘DOT–C3’’ or ‘‘DOT–

C4’’ at least 3mm high at regular

intervals on retroreflective sheeting

material having adequate performance

to provide effective trailer conspicuity.

The manufacturers of new tractors

and trailers are required to certify that

their products are equipped with

retroreflective material complying with

the requirements of the standard. The

Federal Highway Administration Office

of Motor Carrier Safety enforces this and

other standards through roadside

inspections of trucks. There is no

practical field test for the performance

requirements, and labeling is the only

objective way of distinguishing trailer

conspicuity grade material from lower

performance material. Without labeling,

FHWA will not be able to enforce the

performance requirements of the

standard, and the compliance testing of

new tractors and trailers will be

complicated. Labeling is also important

to small trailer manufacturers because it

may help them to certify compliance.

Because wider stripes of material of

lower brightness also can provide the

minimum safety performance, the

marking system serves the additional

role of identifying the minimum stripe

width required for the retroreflective

brightness of the particular material.

Since the differences between the

brightness grades of suitable

retroreflective conspicuity material is

not obvious from inspection, the

marking system is necessary for tractor

and trailer manufacturers and repair

shops to assure compliance and for

FHWA to inspect tractors and trailers in

use.

Permanent labeling is used to identify

retroreflective material having the
54500 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Notices

minimum properties required for

effective conspicuity of trailers at night.

The information enables the FHWA to

make compliance inspections, and it

aids tractor and trailer owners and

repair shops in choosing the correct

repair materials for damaged tractors

and trailers. It also aids small trailer

manufacturers in certifying compliance

of their products. The FHWA will not be

able to determine whether trailers are

properly equipped during roadside

inspections without labeling. The use of

cheaper and more common reflective

materials, which are ineffective for the

application, would be expected in

repairs without the labeling

requirement.

Description of the Likely Respondents

(Including Estimated Number, and

Proposed Frequency of Response to the

Collection of Information)—The

respondents are likely to be

manufacturers of the conspicuity

material. The agency is aware of at least

three. Based on the estimated number of

feet of conspicuity material for a year’s

installation on new tractors and trailers,

the number of imprints of the

information is estimated to be 10

million.

Estimate of the Total Annual

Reporting and Recordkeeping Burden

Resulting from the Collection of

Information—The cost to manufacturers

of extending the label requirement is the

maintenance and amortization of

printing rollers and the additional dye

or ink consumed. The labels are to be

placed at intervals of about 18 inches on

rolls of retroreflective conspicuity tape.

The labels are printed during the normal

course of steady flow manufacturing

operations without a direct time

penalty.

Two methods of printing the label are

in use. One method uses the same roller

that applies the dye to the red segments

of the material pattern. The roller is

resurfaced annually using a

computerized etching technique. The

‘‘DOT–C2’’ label was incorporated in

the software to drive the roller

resurfacing in 1993, and there is no

additional cost to continue the printing

of the label. In fact, costs would be

incurred to discontinue the label.

The second method uses a separate

roller to apply the label. The

manufacturer using this technique

reports that these rollers have been in

service for 5 years without detectable

wear and predicts a service life of at

least fifteen years. Four rollers costing

about $2,500 each are used. A straight

line depreciation of the rollers over 15

years equals $667 per year. With an

annual allowance for $333 for

additional dye, the annual total industry

cost of maintaining the ‘‘DOT–C2’’ label

is about $1,000.

Labeling of Warning Devices, 49 CFR

571.125

Type of Request—Reinstatement of

clearance.

OMB Clearance Number—2127–0506.

Form Number—This collection of

information uses no standard forms.

Requested Expiration Date of

Approval—Three years from date of

approval.

Summary of the Collection of

Information—Federal Motor Vehicle

Safety Standard No. 125, ‘‘Warning

Devices’’ applies to triangular highway

warning devices, without self contained

energy sources, that are designed for

large motor vehicles in interstate

commerce and be placed on the

roadway forward and rearward of

vehicles to warn approaching traffic of

the presence of a stopped vehicle. The

Standard requires that each

manufacturer of warning triangles must

label each device. Without proper

deployment and use, the effectiveness of

the devices may be greatly diminished,

and may lead to serious injuries due to

rear end collisions between moving

traffic and disabled vehicles. The

warning device shall be permanently

and legibly marked and also provide

instructions for its erection and display.

Each device shall be labeled with: (a)

The name of the manufacturer, (b) the

month and year of manufacture, (c) the

DOT symbol, or the statement that the

warning device complies with all

applicable FMVSS. The instructions for

each device shall include a

recommendation that the driver activate

the vehicular hazard warning signal

lamps before leaving the vehicle to erect

the warning device. Also, the

instructions shall include an illustration

indicating recommended positioning.

Description of the Need for the

Information and Proposed use of the

Information—The purpose of the

certification symbol is to assure

consumers that the devices are of the

level of performance required by federal

law. Additionally, each motor vehicle in

interstate commerce is required to be

equipped with such warning devices

that comply with the requirements of

the standard. The Federal Highway

Administration Office of Motor Carrier

Safety enforces this and other standards

through roadside inspections of trucks.

There is no practical field test for the

performance requirements, and labeling

is the only objective way of

distinguishing complying warning

devices from look-alike products that do

not comply. Without labeling, FHWA

will not be able to enforce their

requirement.

The purpose of the requirement for

instructions is to provide information so

that the motoring public can erect and

position the warning device so that the

warning device is positioned to alert the

oncoming traffic of a disabled vehicle

and prevent rear end collisions.

Description of the Likely Respondents

(Including Estimated Number, and

Proposed Frequency of Response to the

Collection of Information)—There are

three manufacturers labeling

approximately 2.85 million warning

devices (triangles) per year.

Estimate of the Total Annual

Reporting and Recordkeeping Burden

Resulting from the Collection of

Information—There are three

manufacturers labeling approximately

2.85 million warning devices (triangles)

per year for the last few years. The

tooling would be replaced after about 20

years of service being used to make

about 200K devices per year. The

machining each mold that would be

replaced is about 8 hours at a cost of

$37.50 per hour, or a cost of $300.

Assuming that this past years

production level of 2.85M devices per

year were built each year for the last

twenty years (an over-estimate that

ignores the long steady growth of the

market), the total number of devices

manufactured would be 57M. The

tooling needs to be replaced every 4M

uses; the total number of tools used in

the last 20 years is 14.25. The

machining for the labeling in each tool

would be 14.25 times 8 hours divided

by 57M, or 0.000002 hour per device.

Thus the current annual cost for the

2.85 M devices manufactured is 5.7

hours × $37.50 = $213.75 .

Collection of Replaceable Headlamp

Light Source Information: 49 CFR Part

564

Type of Request—Renewal of

clearance.

OMB Clearance Number—2127–0563.

Form Number—This collection of

information uses no standard forms.

Requested Expiration Date of

Approval—Three years from date of

approval.

Summary of the Collection of

Information—The information to be

collected is in response to 49 CFR Part

564; Replaceable Light Source

Dimensional Information. Persons

desiring to use newly designed

replaceable headlamp light sources are

required to submit interchangeability

and performance specifications to the

agency. After a short agency review to

assure completeness, the information is

placed in a public docket for use by any
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Notices 54501

person who would desire to

manufacture headlamp light sources for

highway motor vehicles. In Federal

Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108,

‘‘Lamps, reflective devices and

associated equipment,’’ Part 564

submissions are referenced as being the

source of information regarding the

performance and interchangeability

information for legal headlamp light

sources, whether original equipment or

replacement equipment. Thus, the

submitted information about headlamp

light sources becomes the basis for

certification of compliance with safety

standards.

Description of the need for the

information and proposed use of the

information—The information is to be

placed in a public docket for the use by

vehicle, headlamp and headlamp light

source manufacturers for determining

the interchangeability aspects of

headlamp light sources for

manufacturing purposes and for the

design and manufacture of headlamps.

In order for replacement light sources to

be designated as acceptable

replacements, the replacement light

sources also are required to comply with

the dimensional and performance

information in the docket for its type.

The Federal program for reducing

highway fatalities, injuries and

accidents would likely be adversely

affected if the information was not

collected, because the bulbs would, in

fact, not be standardized for

performance and interchangeability. If

the interchangeability information were

not available to manufacturers who

normally provide original equipment

and aftermarket parts, replacements

could become significantly more costly

to replace upon burnout, and ready

availability would also likely diminish

because the replacements would be

available from only the vehicle’s

manufacturer or its dealer. As a

potential adverse safety consequence,

more and more vehicles would likely be

on the highways at night with

headlamps having one or more failed

bulbs because of the higher expense and

lower availability, and therefore reduce

the roadway illumination and increase

the risk of accident. In the event that the

information collection were not

reapproved, it is likely that the agency

would have to reinstate headlamp light

source information as part of the federal

lighting standard and thus any new light

source designs could be used only after

a lengthy and costly rulemaking instead

of this simple review and reference

procedure.

Description of the Likely Respondents

(Including Estimated Number, and

Proposed Frequency of Response to the

Collection of Information—For the

burdened parties, only those which

develop a new or modified headlamp

light source or other additional

interchange information will have to

submit information. Based on the last

three years of Part 564 data collection,

thirteen submissions have been received

from seven manufacturers; three for new

light sources, four for modification of

existing information, and six for

additional information to existing light

sources.

Estimate of the Total Annual

Reporting and Recordkeeping Burden

Resulting from the Collection of

Information—The average estimated

cost of the information submissions is

estimated to be 4.2 hours per

submission at $100 per hour for a cost

of $420 each, thus at a rate of 13/3

submissions per year, the average

annual cost is $1820 and the average

annual hour burden is 18.2 hours.

Labeling of Motor Vehicle Brake Fluid

Containers, 49 CFR 571.116

Type of Request—Reinstatement of

clearance.

OMB Clearance Number—2127–0521.

Form Number—This collection of

information uses no standard forms.

Requested Expiration Date of

Approval—Three years from date of

approval.

Summary of the Collection of

Information—Federal Motor Vehicle

Safety Standard No. 116, ‘‘Motor

Vehicle Brake Fluids,’’ specifies

performance and design requirements

for motor vehicle brake fluids and

hydraulic system mineral oils. Section

5.2.2 specifies labeling requirements for

manufacturers and packagers of brake

fluids as well as packagers of hydraulic

system mineral oils. The information on

the label of a container of motor vehicle

brake fluid or hydraulic system mineral

oil is necessary to insure the following:

the contents of the container are clearly

stated; these fluids are used for their

intended purpose only; and, the

containers are properly disposed of

when empty. Improper use or storage of

these fluids could have dire crash safety

consequences for the operators of

vehicles or equipment in which they are

used.

Description of the Need for the

Information and Proposed Use of the

Information—This labeling information

is used by motor vehicle owners,

operators, and vehicle service facilities

to aid in the proper selection of brake

fluids and hydraulic system mineral oils

for use in motor vehicles and hydraulic

equipment, to assure the continued

safety of motor vehicle braking and

hydraulic systems, respectively. The

information required on the label of

brake fluid and hydraulic mineral oil

containers identifies performance

capabilities of the fluid. The safety

warnings required on brake fluid and

hydraulic system mineral oil containers

are provided to prevent improper use,

storage, etc. which might result in motor

vehicle brake failure and the failure of

equipment utilizing hydraulic system

mineral oil.

Properties of these fluids and their

use necessitate the package labeling

information specified in this standard.

Brake fluid and hydraulic system

mineral oil must be free of contaminants

in order to perform as intended;

therefore, the labeling instructions warn

against storing in unsealed containers or

mixing these fluids with other products.

Also, avoiding the absorption of

moisture is extremely important since

moisture in a brake system degrades

braking performance and safety by

lowering brake fluid’s boiling point,

increasing the fluid’s viscosity at low

atmospheric temperatures and

increasing the risk of brake system

component corrosion. Lower boiling

points increase the risk of brake system

failure and increase the possibility of

vapor lock. The safety warnings also

alert users of brake fluids sold in

containers with capacities less than five

gallons that the containers should not be

refilled or reused for other purposes.

If the labeling requirements were not

mandatory, improving safety on the

nation’s highways would be more

difficult to accomplish. Proper vehicle

brake performance is crucial to the

safety of motor vehicle occupants, and

the information on fluid containers is

necessary to aid in reducing brake

system failures resulting from the use of

improper or contaminated fluid. The

labeling on fluid containers also helps

to ensure that only fluid that complies

with federal requirements is sold, and

this also facilitates agency enforcement

efforts by identifying the fluid packager

or manufacturer.

Description of the Likely Respondents

(Including Estimated Number, and

Proposed Frequency of Response to the

Collection of Information)—There are an

estimated 200 respondents, mainly

those manufacturers involved with the

production of motor vehicle brake and

hydraulic fluids. A label is required on

each container of fluid sold.

Estimate of the Total Annual

Reporting and Recordkeeping Burden

Resulting from the Collection of

Information—The cost of manufacturing

and affixing the labels will vary greatly

for various manufacturers. The majority

of the labels will be manufactured and

affixed in an automated fashion by
54502 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Notices

major manufacturers involving low

material or labor costs. However, for

small manufacturers, the costs in terms

of labor, and to a lesser extent, material

will be somewhat greater. Labels are a

standard part of fluid containers, even

in the absence of a federal requirement

for adding information to the containers.

Thus, the added information required

by the Standard would be added to the

label already existing on the container.

Thus the only cost is for adding the

required information to an existing

label. Typically such labels are silkscreened onto a label material. Thus, the

added information to a label would be

some small part of the total cost of the

silk-screen process used for the

production of the label.

The cost estimate for the total

annualized costs to the respondent for

the incremental aspect of adding this

information to the printing cost of an

existing label may be derived as follows:

(1) Estimate of the number of

respondents—200

(2) Estimate of the number of different

types of labels per respondent—24

(3) Technical burden-hours required to

design the layout of a label that

includes the incrementally added

information—8

(4) Number of hours of label design for

all respondents—38,400

(5) Average annual label design hours

assuming a 5 year label redesign

cycle—7,680

(6) Annual label design cost assuming

$37.50 hourly wage—$288,000

(7) Annual cost of incrementally added

ink for label production (@ $400 per

respondent)—$80,000

(8) Total annual cost of added

information on label (#6+#7)—

$368,000

Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3506(c); delegation of

authority at 49 CFR 1.50.

Dated: October 14, 1997.

Stephen R. Kratzke,

Acting Associate Administrator for Safety

Performance Standards.

[FR Doc. 97–27716 Filed 10–17–97; 8:45 am]

.................... BILLING CODE 4910–59–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Research and Special Programs

Administration

Office of Hazardous Materials Safety;

Notice of Applications for Exemptions

AGENCY: Research and Special Programs

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: List of applicants for

exemptions.

SUMMARY: In accordance with the

procedures governing the application

for, and the processing of, exemptions

from the Department of Transportation’s

Hazardous Materials Regulations (49

CFR Part 107, Subpart B), notice is

hereby given that the Office of

Hazardous Materials Safety has received

the applications described herein. Each

mode of transportation for which a

particular exemption is requested is

indicated by a number in the ‘‘Nature of

Application’’ portion of the table below

as follows: 1—Motor vehicle, 2—Rail

freight, 3—Cargo vessel, 4—Cargo

aircraft only, 5—Passenger-carrying

aircraft.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before November 19, 1997.

ADDRESS COMMENTS TO: Dockets Unit,

Research and Special Programs

Administration, Room 8421, DHM–30,

U.S. Department of Transportation,

Washington, DC 20590.

Comments should refer to the

application number and be submitted in

triplicate. If confirmation of receipt of

comments is desired, include a selfaddressed stamped postcard showing

the exemption application number.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:

Copies of the applications (See Docket

Number) are available for inspection at

the New Docket Management Facility,

PL–401, at the U.S. Department of

Transportation, Nassif Building, 400 7th

Street, SW. Washington, DC 20590.

NEW EXEMPTIONS

Application

No. Docket No. Applicant Regulation(s)affected Nature of exemption thereof

11965–N .. RSPA–97–

2989

J.R. Simplot Company, Edison, CA.49 CFR 174.67(i) &

(j).

To authorize tank cars to remain connected during unloading of

Class 8 material without the physical presence of an unloader.

(Mode 2.)

11966–N .. RSPA–97–

2990

FMC Corporation,

Philadelphia, PA.

49 CFR

173.31(b)(6)(i).

To authorize the transportation in commerce of DOT 111A–

60A1W2 aluminum tank cars equipped with half head shields

instead of full for use in transporting Hydrogen peroxide aqueous solutions, Division 5.1. (Mode 2.)

11967–N .. RSPA–97–

2991

Savage Industries

Inc., Norristown,

PA.

49 CFR 174.67(i) &

(j).

To authorize tank cars to remain connected during unloading of

various hazardous materials to remain connected during unloading without the physical presence of an unloader. (Mode 2.)

11968–N .. RSPA–97–

2992

Air Liquide America

Corp., Houston, TX.

49 CFR 177.834(i)(3) To authorize the unloading of Division 2.1 and 2.2 material from

DOT Specification cargo tanks without the physical presence of

an unloader. (Mode 1)

11970–N RSPA–97–

2993

Exxon Chemical, Inc.,

Baytown, TX.

49 CFR 172.101,

178.245–1(c).

To authorize the transportation in commerce of DOT-Specification

51 portable tanks equipped with a bottom outlet and no internal

shutoff valve for use in transporting pyrophoric solids, inorganic, n.o.s., Division 4.2. (Modes 1, 2, 3.)

11971–N .. RSPA–97–

2994

Regional Airline

Assoc., Washington, DC.

49 CFR 173.34(e) ..... To authorize an alternative retesting procedure for Specification

4DA and 4DS hermetically sealed cylinders which serves as

components of aircraft systems. (Modes 1, 2.)

11972–N .. RSPA–97–

2996

Snaketan, Woodland,

CA.

49 CFR 172.411,

172.448, 172.519,

173.118.

To authorize the transportation in commerce of small quantities of

hazardous materials as essentially non-regulated. (Mode 1.)