55452 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 1997 / Notices

Request for comments

The Coast Guard encourages

interested persons to participate by

submitting written data, views, or

arguments. Persons submitting

comments should include their names

and addresses, identify this specific

Notice of Meeting (CGD01–97–079) and

the specific issue to which each

comment applies, and give reasons for

each comment. The Coast Guard

requests that all comments and

attachments be submitted in an

81⁄2′′×11′′ unbound format suitable for

copying and electronic filing. If this is

not practical, a second copy of any

bound material is requested. Persons

desiring acknowledgment of receipt of

comments should enclose a stamped,

self-addressed postcard or envelope.

The Coast Guard has scheduled a

public meeting on December 4, 1997, at

9 a.m., to receive oral presentations. The

public meeting will be held in the

Function Room on the first floor of

Building 1, at the Coast Guard

Integrated Support Command, 427

Commercial St., Boston, MA.

Background

Barges carrying oil or hazardous

materials in bulk are periodically

anchored in the waters of the COTP

Boston zone without an attending

tugboat. Depending on the weather and

anchor holding conditions, a tank barge

is vulnerable to grounding in the event

that its anchor begins to drag or the

anchor chain breaks. Early detection of

a failed or dragging anchor and the

quick response of a tugboat are essential

in preventing barges from grounding.

This Notice of Meeting is intended to

address these concerns about public

safety and the environment associated

with this practice of leaving anchored

barges unattended.

Agenda of Meeting

Currently, there is no federal

regulation that requires barges carrying

oil or hazardous materials in bulk to be

manned while left unattended at

anchor. The Coast Guard seeks

comments on methods and practices

currently used for determining the

position of a barge and providing tug

assistance. Additionally, the Coast

Guard seeks comments on means of

improving current safety practices

including the use of new technologies,

manning requirements, and tug

assistance.

Procedural

All sessions are open to the public. At

the Chairperson’s discretion, members

of the public may make oral

presentations during the meeting.

Persons wishing to make oral

presentations at the meeting should

notify LT Michael H. Day no later than

November 20, 1997. Written material for

distribution at the meeting should reach

the COTP Boston no later than

November 20, 1997. If a person

submitting material would like copies

distributed in advance of the meeting,

that person should submit 25 copies to

the COTP Boston no later than

November 20, 1997.

Information on Services for the

Handicapped

For information on facilities or

services for the handicapped or to

request special assistance at the

meeting, contact COTP Boston as soon

as possible.

Dated: September 30, 1997.

J.L. Grenier,

Captain of the Port, Boston.

[FR Doc. 97–28288 Filed 10–23–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–14–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

[Docket Nos. 97–048; Notice 2 97–051;

Notice 2 97–052; Notice 2 97–053; Notice

2]

Decision That Certain Nonconforming

Motor Vehicles Are Eligible for

Importation

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of decision by NHTSA

that certain nonconforming motor

vehicles are eligible for importation.

SUMMARY: This notice announces

decisions by NHTSA that certain motor

vehicles not originally manufactured to

comply with all applicable Federal

motor vehicle safety standards are

eligible for importation into the United

States because they are substantially

similar to vehicles originally

manufactured for importation into and/

or sale in the United States and certified

by their manufacturers as complying

with the safety standards, and they are

capable of being readily altered to

conform to the standards.

DATES: These decisions are effective

October 24, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

George Entwistle, Office of Vehicle

Safety Compliance, NHTSA (202–366–

5306).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Under 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A), a

motor vehicle that was not originally

manufactured to conform to all

applicable Federal motor vehicle safety

standards shall be refused admission

into the United States unless NHTSA

has decided that the motor vehicle is

substantially similar to a motor vehicle

originally manufactured for importation

into and sale in the United States,

certified under 49 U.S.C. § 30115, and of

the same model year as the model of the

motor vehicle to be compared, and is

capable of being readily altered to

conform to all applicable Federal motor

vehicle safety standards.

Petitions for eligibility decisions may

be submitted by either manufacturers or

importers who have registered with

NHTSA pursuant to 49 CFR Part 592. As

specified in 49 CFR 593.7, NHTSA

publishes notice in the Federal Register

of each petition that it receives, and

affords interested persons an

opportunity to comment on the petition.

At the close of the comment period,

NHTSA decides, on the basis of the

petition and any comments that it has

received, whether the vehicle is eligible

for importation. The agency then

publishes this decision in the Federal

Register.

NHTSA received petitions from

registered importers to decide whether

the vehicles listed in Annex A to this

notice are eligible for importation into

the United States. To afford an

opportunity for public comment,

NHTSA published notice of these

petitions as specified in Annex A. The

reader is referred to those notices for a

thorough description of the petitions.

No comments were received in response

to these notices. Based on its review of

the information submitted by the

petitioners, NHTSA has decided to grant

the petitions.

Vehicle Eligibility Number for Subject

Vehicles

The importer of a vehicle admissible

under any final decision must indicate

on the form HS–7 accompanying entry

the appropriate vehicle eligibility

number indicating that the vehicle is

eligible for entry. Vehicle eligibility

numbers assigned to vehicles admissible

under this decision are specified in

Annex A.

Final Decision

Accordingly, on the basis of the

foregoing, NHTSA hereby decides that

each motor vehicle listed in Annex A to

this notice, which was not originally

manufactured to comply with all
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 1997 / Notices 55453

applicable Federal motor vehicle safety

standards, is substantially similar to a

motor vehicle manufactured for

importation into and/or sale in the

United States, and certified under 49

U.S.C. 30115, as specified in Annex A,

and is capable of being readily altered

to conform to all applicable Federal

motor vehicle safety standards.

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

(b)(1); 49 CFR 593.8; delegations of authority

at 49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8.

Issued on: October 20, 1997.

Marilynne Jacobs,

Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.

Annex—A—Nonconforming Motor

Vehicles Decided To Be Eligible For

Importation

1. Docket No. 97–048

Nonconforming Vehicles: 1990–1994,

1996, and 1997 Saab 900 SE

Substantially similar U.S.-certified

vehicles: 1990–1994, 1996, and 1997

Saab 900 SE

Notice of Petition published at: 62 FR

42157 (August 5, 1997)

Vehicle Eligibility Number: VSP–219

2. Docket No. 97–051

Nonconforming Vehicles: 1987–1997

Kawasaki ZX400 Motorcycles

Substantially similar U.S.-certified

vehicles: 1987–1997 Kawasaki ZX600

Motorcycles

Notice of Petition published at: 62 FR

43425 (August 13, 1997)

Vehicle Eligibility Number: VSP–222

3. Docket No. 97–052

Nonconforming Vehicles: 1996–1997

Ducati 748 Biposto Motorcycles

Substantially similar U.S.-certified

vehicles: 1996–1997 Ducati 916 Biposto

Motorcycles

Notice of Petition published at: 62 FR

43770 (August 15, 1997)

Vehicle Eligibility Number: VSP–220

4. Docket No. 97–053

Nonconforming Vehicles: 1992, 1994–1997

BMW 750iL

Substantially similar U.S.-certified

vehicles: 1992, 1994–1997 BMW 750iL

Notice of Petition published at: 62 FR

43771 (August 15, 1997)

Vehicle Eligibility Number: VSP–221.

[FR Doc. 97–28279 Filed 10–23–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

Petition for Modification of a

Previously Approved Antitheft Device;

Saab

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration (NHTSA)

Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Grant of petition for

modification of a previously approved

antitheft device.

SUMMARY: On June 20, 1997, Saab Cars,

USA, Inc. (Saab) filed a petition with

the National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration (NHTSA) asking for a

second modification to an agencyapproved exemption from the vehicle

theft prevention standard for its 900 car

line. NHTSA is granting Saab’s petition

for modification of its exemption from

the parts-marking requirements of the

vehicle theft prevention standard for its

model year (MY) 1999 900 car line

because it has determined, based on

substantial evidence, that the antitheft

device described in Saab’s petition to be

placed on the car line as standard

equipment is likely to be as effective in

reducing and deterring motor vehicle

theft as compliance with the partsmarking requirements.

DATES: The exemption granted by this

notice is effective at the beginning of the

1999 model year.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.

Rosalind Proctor, Office of Planning and

Consumer Programs, NHTSA, 400

Seventh Street, S.W., Washington, DC

20590. Ms. Proctor’s telephone number

is (202) 366–0846. Her fax number is

(202) 493–2739.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July

26, 1993, NHTSA published in the

Federal Register a notice granting a

petition from Saab for an exemption

from the parts marking requirements of

the vehicle theft prevention standard for

the Saab 900 car line beginning with

MY 1994 (See 58 FR 39853). By letters

dated September 8 and 12, 1994, Saab

petitioned for the first modification to

its device. The agency determined that

the proposed changes made on Saab

900’s antitheft device for MY 1995 were

de minimis changes and did not require

it to submit a petition to modify its

exemption pursuant to 49 CFR Part

543.9(c)(2).

On June 20, 1997, Saab submitted a

second petition for modification of its

previously approved antitheft system for

MY 1999. According to the petition,

Saab will begin MY 1999 production of

the 900 car line in February 1998. This

notice responds to that petition.

Saab’s submission is a complete

petition, as required by 49 CFR Part

543.9(d), in that it meets the general

requirements contained in 49 CFR Part

543.5 and the specific content

requirements of 49 CFR Part 543.6.

Saab’s petition also provided a detailed

description of the identity, design and

location of the components of the

antitheft system, including diagrams of

the components and their location in

the vehicle beginning with the 1999

model year. On August 20, 1997, the

agency contacted Saab by telephone and

obtained additional information which

clarified the nature of the changes to its

antitheft system for the 900 car line for

MY 1999.

In its MY 1999 petition, Saab stated

that for its MY 1999 car line, the driver/

operator will be able to arm the system,

activate the central-locking feature and

monitor the protected areas of the

vehicle from unauthorized tampering

either by using the remote transmitter or

locking the driver’s or passenger’s door

with the correct ignition key. This is a

change from the previously approved

system, in which only the remote

transmitter had the capability to arm

and disarm the system and only the

ignition key could activate the centrallocking feature.

In addition, Saab stated that for MY

1999, the remote transmitter will not

arm or disarm the starter immobilization

feature of the system. The only way to

activate and deactivate that feature will

be by using the correct ignition key

containing a radio signal transponder. In

the previously approved system, the

starter immobilization feature as well as

the ignition and fuel immobilization

features could be armed and disarmed

by using the remote transmitter.

The petition also states that the MY

1999 Saab 900 car line will incorporate

a battery backup for the alarm siren,

‘‘free wheeling’’ door lock cylinders, a

tilt sensor which will detect possible

theft of the vehicle by means of a flatbed

or tow truck removal, and a panic

function feature.

Saab also stated that for MY 1999, the

electronic components in the 900 car

line will use more advanced technology

between various vehicle systems,

including but not limited to the engine

management system and the on-board

diagnostic requirements. Beginning with

MY 1999, the 900 car line will

incorporate a new advanced

communications architecture, ‘‘CAN–

BUS’’. The ‘‘CAN–BUS’’ architecture

will improve the speed and reliability of

the electronic communications between

vehicle systems, and allow

improvements in the standard antitheft

system.

However, Saab noted that the use of

the ‘‘CAN-BUS’’ architecture means that

it will not be able to use the fuel and

ignition immobilization features of its

antitheft system in all of the vehicles for

the 900 car line in the 1999 model year.

These features will be present only in

those vehicles that are equipped with a

turbo-charged engine; they will not be

present in the vehicles with the 2.3 liter