62398 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 225 / Friday, November 21, 1997 / Notices

strategic national defense needs and for

preparing the report to Congress on the

status of the Nation’s highway bridges

and funding under the HBRRP.

Respondents: Transportation agencies

of the 50 States and the District of

Columbia and Puerto Rico.

Average Burden per Response: The

average burden is two hours per

response.

Estimated Total Annual Burden: The

estimated total annual burden is

540,000 hours.

Frequency: Annually.

Authority: 23 U.S.C. Sections 144 and 151,

and 23 C.F.R. 650.307, 650.311, and 650.407.

Issued On: October 31, 1997.

George Moore,

Associate Administrator for Administration.

[FR Doc. 97–30577 Filed 11–20–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–22–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Highway Administration

[FHWA Docket No. 97–3033]

Notice of Request for Renewal of an

Existing Information Collection

AGENCY: Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for

comments.

SUMMARY: In accordance with the

requirement of section 3506(c)(2)(A) of

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,

this notice announces the intention of

the FHWA to request the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB) to

renew the information collection

identified below under supplementary

information.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on

or before January 20, 1998.

ADDRESSES: All signed, written

comments should refer to the docket

number that appears in the heading of

this document and must be submitted to

the Docket Clerk, U.S. DOT Dockets,

Room PL–401, 400 Seventh Street, SW.,

Washington, DC 20590–0001. All

comments received will be available for

examination at the above address

between 10:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., e.t.,

Monday through Friday, except Federal

holidays. Those desiring notification of

receipt of comments must include a selfaddressed, stamped postcard/envelope.

Interested parties are invited to send

comments regarding any aspect of this

information collection, including, but

not limited to: (1) The necessity and

utility of the information collection for

the proper performance of the functions

of the FHWA; (2) the accuracy of the

estimated burden; (3) ways to enhance

the quality, utility, and clarity of the

collected information; and (4) ways to

minimize the collection burden without

reducing the quality of the collected

information. Comments submitted in

response to this notice will be

summarized and/or included in the

request for OMB renewal of this

information collection.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Jack Wasley, Office of Engineering, 202–

366–4658, Federal Highway

Administration, Department of

Transportation, 400 Seventh Street,

SW., Washington, DC 20590. Office

hours are from 7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m.,

e.t., Monday through Friday, except

Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Title: Preparation and execution of the

Project Agreement and Modifications.

OMB Number: 2125–0529.

Background: Under the provisions of

23 U.S.C. 110, a formal agreement

between the State highway agency and

the FHWA is required for Federal-aid

highway projects. This agreement,

referred to as the ‘‘project agreement,’’ is

in essence a written contract between

the State and the Federal government

defining the extent of the work to be

undertaken and commitments made

concerning the project.

The requirements covering project

agreements are contained in 23 CFR part

630, subpart C.

Respondents: State highway agencies.

Estimated Annual Burden on

Respondents: The estimated annual

reporting burden is approximately

12,040 hours.

Authority: 23 U.S.C. 110; 23 CFR 630,

subpart C.

Issued On: October 31, 1997.

George Moore,

Associate Administrator for Administration.

[FR Doc. 97–30591 Filed 11–20–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–22–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA–97–3122; Notice 1]

Dan Hill & Associates, Inc.; Petition for

Temporary Exemption From Federal

Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 224

Dan Hill & Associates, Inc., of

Norman, Oklahoma, has petitioned for a

one-year temporary exemption from

Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 224

Rear Impact Protection. The basis of the

petition is that compliance would cause

substantial economic hardship to a

manufacturer that has tried in good faith

to comply with the standard.

This notice of receipt of the petition

is published in accordance with agency

regulations on the subject and does not

represent any judgment by the agency

about the merits of the petition.

The applicant manufactures and sells

a horizontal discharge trailer (‘‘Flow

Boy’’) that is used in the road

construction industry to deliver asphalt

and other road building materials to the

construction site. The Flow Boy is

designed to connect with and latch onto

various paving machines (‘‘pavers’’).

The Flow Boy, with its hydraulically

controlled horizontal discharge system,

discharges hot mix asphalt at a

controlled rate into a paver which

overlays the road surface with asphalt

material.

Standard No. 224 requires, effective

January 26, 1998, that all trailers with a

GVWR of 4536 Kg or more, including

Flow Boy trailers, be fitted with a rear

impact guard that conforms to Standard

No. 223 Rear impact guards. Installation

of the rear impact guard will prevent the

Flow Boy from connecting to the paver.

Thus, Flow Boy trailers will no longer

be functional and contractors will be

forced to use standard dump body

trucks or trailers with their inherent

limitations and safety risks.

The applicant, which manufactured

81 Flow Boy trailers in 1996 (plus 21

other trailers), has asked for a year’s

exemption in order to explore the

feasibility of a rear impact guard that

will allow the Flow Boy trailer to

connect to a conventional paver. In the

absence of an exemption, it believes that

approximately 60 percent of its work

force would have to be laid off. Its gross

revenues would decrease by $6,000,000

(these have averaged $13,885,000 over

its 1994, 1995, and 1996 fiscal years).

Present studies show that the placement

of the retractable rear impact guard

would likely catch excess asphalt as it

was discharged into the pavement

hopper. Further, the increased cost of

the Flow Body would likely cause

contractors to choose the cheaper

alternative of dump trucks. Finally, the

increased weight of the retractable rear

impact guard would significantly

decrease the payload of the Flow Boy.

Applicant sent its Product Specialist

to Germany in 1994 to view underride

protection guards installed by a German

customer on Flow Boy trailers but the

technology proved inapplicable because

of differences between German and

American pavers. Manufacturers of

paving machines are not interested in

redesigning their equipment to

accommodate a Flow Boy with a rear