60558 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 217 / Monday, November 10, 1997 / Notices

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: November 4, 1997.

Marilynne Jacobs,

Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.

[FR Doc. 97–29603 Filed 11–7–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–59–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA–97–3067; Notice 1]

Notice of Receipt of Petition for

Decision That Nonconforming 1992–

1994 Kawasaki EL250 Motorcycles Are

Eligible for Importation

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of receipt of petition for

decision that nonconforming 1992–1994

Kawasaki EL250 motorcycles are

eligible for importation.

SUMMARY: This document announces

receipt by the National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration (NHTSA) of a

petition for a decision that 1992–1994

Kawasaki EL250 motorcycles that were

not originally manufactured to comply

with all applicable Federal motor

vehicle safety standards are eligible for

importation into the United States

because (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,

and (2) they are capable of being readily

altered to conform to the standards.

DATES: The closing date for comments

on the petition is December 10, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to

the docket number and notice number,

and be submitted to: Docket

Management, Room PL–401, 400

Seventh St., SW, Washington, DC

20590. [Docket hours are from 10 am to

5 pm.]

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.

Champagne Imports, Inc. of Lansdale,

Pennsylvania (‘‘Champagne’’)

(Registered Importer 90–009) has

petitioned NHTSA to decide whether

1992–1994 Kawasaki EL250 motorcycles

are eligible for importation into the

United States. The vehicles which

Champagne believes are substantially

similar are 1992–1994 Kawasaki EX–250

motorcycles that were manufactured for

importation into, and sale in, the United

States and certified by their

manufacturer as conforming to all

applicable Federal motor vehicle safety

standards.

The petitioner claims that it carefully

compared 1992–1994 Kawasaki EL250

motorcycles to 1992–1994 Kawasaki

EX–250 motorcycles, and found the

vehicles to be substantially similar with

respect to compliance with most Federal

motor vehicle safety standards.

Champagne submitted information

with its petition intended to

demonstrate that non-U.S. certified

1992–1994 Kawasaki EL250

motorcycles, as originally

manufactured, conform to many Federal

motor vehicle safety standards in the

same manner as 1992–1994 Kawasaki

EX–250 motorcycles, or are capable of

being readily altered to conform to those

standards.

Specifically, the petitioner claims that

1992–1994 Kawasaki EL250 motorcycles

are identical to 1992–1994 Kawasaki

EX–250 motorcycles with respect to

compliance with Standard Nos. 106

Brake Hoses, 111 Rearview Mirrors, 116

Brake Fluid, 119 New Pneumatic Tires

for Vehicles other than Passenger Cars,

and 122 Motorcycle Brake Systems.

Petitioner also contends that the

vehicles are capable of being readily

altered to meet the following standards,

in the manner indicated:

Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective

Devices and Associated Equipment:

installation of U.S.-model headlamp

assemblies.

Standard No. 120 Tire Selection and

Rims for Vehicles other than Passenger

Cars: installation of a tire information

placard.

Standard No. 123 Motorcycle Controls

and Displays: installation of a U.S.

model speedometer calibrated in miles

per hour.

The petitioner also states that vehicle

identification number plates meeting

the requirements of 49 CFR Part 565

will be affixed to 1992–1994 Kawasaki

EL250 motorcycles.

Comments should refer to the docket

number and be submitted to: Docket

Management, Room PL–401, 400

Seventh Street, S.W., Washington, DC

20590. It is requested but not required

that 10 copies be submitted.

All comments received before the

close of business on the closing date

indicated above 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 petition

will be published in the Federal

Register pursuant to the authority

indicated below.

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: November 4, 1997.

Marilynne Jacobs,

Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.

[FR Doc. 97–29604 Filed 11–7–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA–97–3021; Notice 2]

Notice of Receipt of Petition for

Decision That Nonconforming 1994–

1997 BMW R1100 Motorcycles Are

Eligible for Importation; Correction

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.

ACTION: Correction to notice of receipt of

petition for decision that

nonconforming 1994–1997 BMW R1100

motorcycles are eligible for importation.

SUMMARY: This document corrects a

notice published Wednesday, October

22, 1997 (62 FR 54896) announcing

receipt by NHTSA of a petition for a
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 217 / Monday, November 10, 1997 / Notices 60559

1Applicants have already received authority to

pool their operations and revenues for their motor

passenger and express transportation service

between Philadelphia, PA, and New York City in

Peter Pan Bus Lines, Inc.—Pooling—Greyhound

Lines, Inc., STB Docket No. MC–F–20904 (STB

served June 30, 1997). A similar request involving

operations between New York City and

Washington, DC is pending in Peter Pan Bus Lines,

Inc.—Pooling—Greyhound Lines, Inc., STB Docket

No. MC–F–20908. According to applicants, the

instant application is a logical extension of the New

York-Philadelphia pooling and the New YorkWashington pooling. Applicants state that they

intend to file a fourth such application involving

operations between Albany, NY, and Boston, MA

shortly. Applicants state that they consider the four

agreements to be interrelated and intend to

implement them simultaneously after approval by

the Board. We note that the United States

Department of Justice, Antitrust Division, has filed

comments in STB Docket No. MC–F–20908,

recommending that the Board find that there is a

substantial likelihood that the proposed pooling of

operations between New York City and Washington

would unduly restrain competition.

decision that 1994–1997 BMW R1100

motorcycles that were not originally

manufactured to comply with all

applicable Federal motor vehicle safety

standards are eligible for importation

into the United States. The notice

incorrectly identified the docket number

for this petition as ‘‘Docket No. NHTSA

3021.’’ The docket number should have

been properly identified as ‘‘Docket No.

NHTSA–97–3021.’’ Those intending to

comment on the petition should ensure

that they reference the correct docket

number in their comments.

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

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

at 49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8.

Issued on November 5, 1997.

Marilynne Jacobs,

Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.

[FR Doc. 97–29605 Filed 11–7–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Surface Transportation Board

[STB Docket No. MC–F–20912]

Peter Pan Bus Lines, Inc.—Pooling—

Greyhound Lines, Inc.

AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board,

DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed pooling

application.

SUMMARY: Applicants, Peter Pan Bus

Lines, Inc., of Springfield, MA, and

Greyhound Lines, Inc., of Dallas, TX,

jointly seek approval under 49 U.S.C.

14302 of an operations and revenue

pooling agreement to govern their motor

passenger and express transportation

service between Boston, MA, and New

York, NY, and between Springfield, MA,

and New York, NY.

DATES: Comments are due by, December

10, 1997 and, if comments are filed,

applicants’ rebuttal statement is due by

December 30, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Send an original and 10

copies of any comments referring to STB

Docket No. MC-F–20912 to: Surface

Transportation Board, Office of the

Secretary, Case Control Unit, 1925 K

Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20423–

0001. Also, send one copy of comments

to each of applicants’ representatives:

(1) Jeremy Kahn, Suite 810, 1730 Rhode

Island Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC

20036; (2) Fritz R. Kahn, Suite 750 West,

1100 New York Avenue, N.W.,

Washington, DC 20005–3934.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Joseph H. Dettmar, (202) 565–1600.

[TDD for the hearing impaired: (202)

565–1695.]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Applicants are competitors on certain

intercity routes between Boston, MA,

and New York, NY, and between

Springfield, MA, and New York, NY.

They seek to pool portions of their

passenger and express services over

routes which they both operate, and to

share the revenues derived from their

operations over these routes.1

Applicants state that their services

between these points overlap and that

excess schedules are operated because

of the need to protect their respective

market shares. According to applicants,

this has resulted in unacceptably low

load factors, an over-served market, and

inefficient operations.

Applicants submit that the pooling

agreement will allow them to reduce

excess bus capacity, cement their

business relationship, and allow them to

share in the financial vicissitudes of the

pooled-route operations. They claim

public benefits that will include: (1)

Rationalization of schedules,

eliminating some duplicative departures

‘‘on the hour’’ while adding some

departures on the half-hour during the

busiest times of the day, resulting in

more frequent bus service over a broader

time period; (2) more coordinated use of

terminals and ticketing agents, resulting

in greater flexibility for passengers to

use buses, tickets, and terminals; (3)

capital improvements; and (4)

continued bus service by more sound

and financially stable carriers. In

addition, they assert that approval of the

pooling agreement will not significantly

affect either the quality of the human

environment or the conservation of

energy resources. In fact, they claim that

the reduction in the number of

schedules each carrier operates will

result in a salutary effect on the

environment.

Applicants state that competition will

not be unreasonably restrained. They

argue that: (1) The pooled service is

subject to substantial intermodal

competitive pressure from Amtrak,

airlines, and private automobiles; and

(2) other motor passenger carriers may

easily enter and compete in the market.

Copies of the application may be

obtained free of charge by contacting

applicants’ representatives. A copy of

this notice will be served on the

Department of Justice, Antitrust

Division, 10th Street & Pennsylvania

Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20530.

Decided: October 30, 1997.

By the Board, Chairman Morgan and Vice

Chairman Owen.

Vernon A. Williams,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–29613 Filed 11–7–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4915–00–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and

Firearms

Proposed Collection; Comment

Request

ACTION: Notice and request for

comments.

SUMMARY: The Department of the

Treasury, as part of its continuing effort

to reduce paperwork and respondent

burden, invites the general public and

other Federal agencies to take this

opportunity to comment on proposed

and/or continuing information

collections, as required by the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,

Public Law 104–13 (44 U.S.C.

3506(c)(2)(A)). Currently, the Bureau of

Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms within

the Department of the Treasury is

soliciting comments concerning the

Application For Amended Basic Permit

Under the Federal Alcohol

Administration Act.

DATES: Written comments should be

received on or before January 9, 1998 to

be assured of consideration.

ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments

to Linda Barnes, Bureau of Alcohol,

Tobacco and Firearms, 650

Massachusetts Avenue, NW.,

Washington, DC 20226, (202) 927–8930.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Requests for additional information or

copies of the form(s) and instructions

should be directed to Marsha Baker,

Regulations Branch. 650 Massachusetts

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20226,

(202) 927–8476.