Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 235 / Monday, December 8, 1997 / Notices 64621

of users access to specific information as

governed by Federal privacy laws.

d. VIS will control access by requiring

that users provide a valid account name

and password. VIS will contain a

function that tracks system usage for

other authorized users (i.e., nonparticipating states, commercial

institutions, and private individuals).

VIS will require users to change access

control identifiers at six month

intervals.

The U.S. Coast Guard will operate the

VIS in consonance with Federal security

regulations, policy, procedures,

standards and guidance for

implementing the Automated

Information Systems Security Program.

e. Only authorized DOT personnel

and authorized U.S. Government

contractors conducting system

maintenance may access VIS records.

f. Access to records are password

protected and the scope of access for

each password is limited to the official

need of each individual authorized

access.

g. Additional protection is afforded by

the use of password security, data

encryption, and the use of a secure

network, National Law Enforcement

Telecommunications System (NLETS).

RETENTION AND DISPOSAL:

a. Records of active cases will be

retained until they become inactive;

inactive cases will be archived and

retained for 50 years. Records will be

selected to be archived into an off-line

file for any vessel that has been inactive

for a period of 10 years. A vessel is

inactive when the State number and/or

Coast Guard Document have expired

with the exception of the vessels that

have a law enforcement hold and

vessels with a law enforcement status of

stolen.

b. Daily backups shall be performed

automatically. The backups will be

comprised of weekly full backups

followed by daily incremental backups;

a log of transactions is maintained daily

for recovery purposes.

c. Copies of backups are stored at an

off-site location.

SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESS:

Department of Transportation, United

States Coast Guard Headquarters,

Information Resource Division, System

Development Division (G–MRI–3), 2100

2nd Street, SW, Washington, DC 20593–

0001.

NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE:

Submit a written request noting the

information desired and for what

purpose the information will be used.

The request must be signed by the

individual or his/her legal

representative. Send the request to:

USCG Headquarters, Commandant (G–

SII), 2100 2nd Street, SW., Washington,

DC 20593–0001.

RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES:

Same as Notification Procedures.

CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURES:

Same as Notification Procedures.

RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES:

All information entered into the VIS

is gathered from participating states and

the National Crime Information Center

(NCIC) in the course of normal routine

business. VIS information will be

accessible through the Coast Guard Data

Network (CGDN), National Law

Enforcement Telecommunications

System (NLETS), the Internet, and dialup modem. VIS shall also interface with

the Coast Guard’s existing Merchant

Vessel Documentation System (MVDS)

DOT/CG 591 to provide participating

states with information on USCG

documented vessels and interface with

the Motorboat Registration System to

provide participating states with

information on vessels registered by the

Coast Guard for the state of Alaska.

EXEMPTIONS CLAIMED FOR THE SYSTEM:

Portions of this system of records may

be exempt from disclosure under the

provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2).

However, in specific cases where

maintenance of information results in

the denial of a right, privileges or

benefits to which the individual is

entitled, the information will be

released in accordance with section

(k)(2). This provides in part that

material compiled for law enforcement

purposes may be withheld from

disclosure to the extent the identity of

the source of the information would be

revealed by disclosing the investigatory

record, and the source has received an

express promise that his/her identity

would be held in confidence.

Additionally, material received prior to

27 September 1974 will be withheld, if

the source received an implied promise

that his/her identity would be held in

confidence.

Dated: November 19, 1997.

Eugene K. Taylor, Jr.,

Director, Information Resource Management,

Department of Transportation.

[FR Doc. 97–32061 Filed 12–5–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–62–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Aviation Rulemaking Advisory

Committee; Transport Airplane and

Engine Issues; New Tasks

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of a new task assignment

for the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory

Committee (ARAC).

SUMMARY: Notice is given of new tasks

assigned to and accepted by the

Aviation Rulemaking Advisory

Committee (ARAC). This notice informs

the public of the activities of ARAC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Stewart R. Miller, Manager, Transport

Standards Staff, ANM–110, FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft

Certification Service, 1601 Lind Ave.

SW., Renton, WA 98055–4056,

telephone (425) 227–2190, fax (425)

227–1320.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The FAA has established an Aviation

Rulemaking Advisory Committee to

provide advice and recommendations to

the FAA Administrator, through the

Associate Administrator for Regulation

and Certification, on the full range of

the FAA’s rulemaking activities with

respect to aviation-related issues. This

includes obtaining advice and

recommendations on the FAA’s

commitment to harmonize its Federal

Aviation Regulations (FAR) and

practices with its trading partners in

Europe and Canada.

One area ARAC deals with is

Transport Airplane and Engine issues.

These issues involve the airworthiness

standards for transport category

airplanes in 14 CFR parts 25, 33, and 35

and parallel provisions in 14 CFR parts

121 and 135. The corresponding

European airworthiness standards for

transport category airplanes are

contained in Joint Aviation

Requirements (JAR)–25, JAR–E, and

JAR–P, respectively. The corresponding

Canadian Standards are contained in

Chapters 525, 533, and 535 respectively.

The Tasks

This notice is to inform the public

that the FAA has asked ARAC to

provide advice and recommendation on

the following harmonization tasks:

Task 1. As a short-term project,

consider the need for a regulation that

requires installation of ice detectors,

aerodynamic performance monitors, or

another acceptable means to warn
64622 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 235 / Monday, December 8, 1997 / Notices

flightcrews of ice accumulation on

critical surfaces requiring crew action

(regardless of whether the icing

conditions are inside or outside of

Appendix C of 14 CFR Part 25). Also

consider the need for a Technical

Standard Order for design and/or

minimum performance specifications

for an ice detector and aerodynamic

performance monitors. Develop the

appropriate regulation and applicable

standards and advisory material if a

consensus on the need for such devices

is reached. (Schedule: September 1998,

Reach agreement on proposed rule;

January 1999, NPRM package delivered

to FAA from ARAC; March 1999,

Publish NPRM; March 2000, Publish

Final Rule.)

As long-term projects:

Task 2. Review National

Transportation Safety Board

recommendations A–96–54, A–96–56,

and A–96–58, and advances in ice

protection state-of-the-art. In light of

this review, define an icing environment

that includes supercooled large droplets

(SLD), and devise requirements to assess

the ability of aircraft to safely operate

either for the period of time to exit or

to operate without restriction in SLD

aloft, in SLD at or near the surface, and

in mixed phase conditions if such

conditions are determined to be more

hazardous than the liquid phase icing

environment containing supercooled

water droplets. Consider the effects of

icing requirement changes on 14 CFR

part 23 and part 25 and revise the

regulations if necessary. In addition,

consider the need for a regulation that

requires installation of a means to

discriminate between conditions within

and outside the certification envelope.

(Schedule: September 1999, Reach

technical agreement; January 2000,

NPRM package delivered to FAA from

ARAC; March 2000, Publish NPRM;

March 2001, Publish Final Rule.)

Task 3. Propose changes to make the

requirements of 14 CFR 23.1419 and

25.1419 the same (Schedule: September

1999, Reach technical agreement;

January 2000, NPRM package delivered

to FAA from ARAC; March 2000,

Publish NPRM; March 2001, Publish

Final Rule)

Task 4. Harmonize 14 CFR

§§ 23.1419, 25.1419, 25.929, and

25.1093 and JAR 23.1419, 25.1419,

25.929, and 25.1093. (Schedule:

September 1999, Reach technical

agreement; January 2000, NPRM

package delivered to FAA from ARAC;

March 2000, Publish NPRM; March

2001, Publish Final Rule)

Task 5. Consider the effects icing

requirement changes may have on 14

CFR §§ 25.773(b)(1)(ii), 25.1323(e),

25.1325(b) and revise the regulations if

necessary. (Schedule: September 1999,

Reach technical agreement; January

2000, NPRM Package delivered to FAA

from ARAC; March 2000, Publish

NPRM; March 2001, Publish Final Rule

(if necessary)).

Task 6. Consider the need for a

regulation on ice protection of angle of

attack probes (Schedule: September

1999, Reach technical agreement;

January 2000, NPRM package delivered

to FAA from ARAC; March 2000,

Publish NPRM; March 2001, Publish

Final Rule (if necessary)).

Task 7. Develop or update advisory

material pertinent to items 2 through 6

above. (Schedule: October 2000,

Advisory material package delivered to

FAA from ARAC; March 2001, Publish

advisory material).

If ARAC determines rulemaking

action (e.g., NPRM, supplemental

NPRM, final rule, withdrawal) should

be taken, or advisory material should be

issued or revised, it has been asked to

prepare the necessary documents,

including economic analysis, to justify

and carry out its recommendation(s).

ARAC Acceptance of Tasks

ARAC has accepted these tasks and

has chosen to assign them to a new Ice

Protection Harmonization Working

Group (IPHWG) under the Transport

Airplane and Engine issue. The new

working group will serve as staff to

ARAC to assist ARAC in the analysis of

the assigned tasks. Working group

recommendations must be reviewed and

approved by ARAC. If ARAC accepts the

working group’s recommendations, it

forwards them to the FAA as ARAC

recommendations.

The IPHWG will coordinate with the

Flight Test Harmonization Working

Group, other harmonization working

groups, organizations, and specialists as

appropriate. Other affected groups,

organizations, and specialists may

include but not be limited to the

Powerplant Installation Harmonization

Working Group, Engine Harmonization

Working Group, General Aviation

Manufacturers Association (GAMA),

human factors specialists, and

meteorologists. Coordination with the

Flight Test Harmonization Working

Group will be necessary to ensure that

the IPHWG does not initiate work on

issues already being addressed by the

Flight Test group. Coordination with

GAMA will be necessary to ensure that

the proposed NASA Advanced General

Aviation Transport Experiment project

is considered throughout the process of

accomplishing the short and long term

projects. The IPHWG will request ARAC

assignment of tasks to existing working

groups if necessary. The IPHWG will

identify to ARAC the need for

additional new working groups when

existing groups do not have the

appropriate expertise to address certain

tasks.

Working Group Activity

The Ice Protection Harmonization

Working Group is expected to comply

with the procedures adopted by ARAC.

As part of the procedures, the working

group is expected to:

1. Recommend a work plan for

completion of the tasks, including the

rationale supporting such a plan, for

consideration at the meeting of ARAC to

consider Transport Airplane and Engine

Issues held following publication of this

notice.

2. Give a detailed conceptual

presentation of the proposed

recommendations, prior to proceeding

with the work stated in item 3 below.

3. For each task, draft appropriate

regulatory documents with supporting

economic and other required analyses,

and/or any other related guidance

material or collateral documents the

working group determines to be

appropriate; or, if new or revised

requirements or compliance methods

are not recommended, a draft report

stating the rationale for not making such

recommendations.

4. Provide a status report at each

meeting of ARAC held to consider

Transport Airplane and Engine Issues.

Participation in the Working Group

The Ice Protection Harmonization

Working Group will be composed of

experts having an interest in the

assigned tasks. A working group

member need not be a representative of

a member of the full committee.

An individual who has expertise in

the subject matter and wishes to become

a member of the working group should

write to the person listed under the

caption FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT expressing that desire,

describing his or her interest in the

tasks, and stating the expertise he or she

would bring to the working group. The

request will be reviewed by the assistant

chair, the assistant executive director,

and the working group chair, and the

individual will be advised whether or

not the request can be accommodated.

The Secretary of Transportation has

determined that the formation and use

of ARAC are necessary and in the public

interest in connection with the

performance of duties imposed on the

FAA by law.

Meetings of ARAC will be open to the

public. Meetings of the Ice Protection

Harmonization Working Group will not
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 235 / Monday, December 8, 1997 / Notices 64623

be open to the public, except to the

extent that individuals with an interest

and expertise are selected to participate.

No public announcement of working

group meetings will be made.

Issued in Washington, DC, on November

24, 1997.

Joseph A. Hawkins,

Executive Director, Aviation Rulemaking

Advisory Committee.

[FR Doc. 97–32034 Filed 12–5–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA–97–3163]

Decision That Nonconforming 1995

Ferrari F50 Passenger Cars Are

Eligible for Importation

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of decision by NHTSA

that nonconforming 1995 Ferrari F50

passenger cars are eligible for

importation.

SUMMARY: This notice announces the

decision by NHTSA that 1995 Ferrari

F50 passenger cars 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 sale in the United States and

certified by their manufacturer as

complying with the safety standards

(the U.S.-certified version of the 1995

Ferrari F50), and they are capable of

being readily altered to conform to the

standards.

DATE: This decision is effective

December 8, 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.

J.K. Motors of Kingsville, Maryland

(‘‘J.K.’’) (Registered Importer R–90–006)

petitioned NHTSA to decide whether

1995 Ferrari F50 passenger cars are

eligible for importation into the United

States. NHTSA published notice of the

petition on August 18, 1997 (62 FR

44030) to afford an opportunity for

public comment. The reader is referred

to that notice for a thorough description

of the petition.

One comment was received in

response to the notice, from Fiat Auto

U.S.A., Inc. (Fiat), the U.S.

representative of Ferrari, S.p.A., the

vehicle’s manufacturer. In its comment,

Fiat observed that non-U.S. certified

1995 Ferrari F50 passenger cars are

equipped with manual 3-point seat belts

while their U.S. certified counterparts

are equipped with motorized 2-point

shoulder belts and manual 2-point lap

belts. Fiat contended that modification

of a non-U.S. certified 1995 Ferrari F50

for compliance with the automatic

restraint requirements of Federal Motor

Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No.

208, Occupant Crash Protection, would

be very difficult, if not impossible,

owing to the fact that the vehicle has a

carbon body. Fiat additionally observed

that the petitioner inaccurately

described the vehicle as having ‘‘rear

belts,’’ in view of the fact that it is a two

seater. With respect to the requirements

of FMVSS No. 210, Seat Belt Assembly

Anchorages, Fiat claimed that non-U.S.

certified 1995 Ferrari F50 passenger cars

have 3-point anchorages, while their

U.S. certified counterparts have 4-point

anchorages. Addressing the

requirements of FMVSS No. 214, Side

Impact Protection, Fiat contended that

U.S. certified 1995 Ferrari F50

passenger cars have a steel beam inside

their doors that cannot be simply added

to the non-U.S. certified version of the

vehicle.

NHTSA afforded J.K. an opportunity

to respond to Fiat’s comments. With

respect to Fiat’s comments regarding

FMVSS No. 208 and 210 compliance

issues, J.K. responded that the automatic

belt system that is supplied on the U.S.

certified 1995 Ferrari F50 bolts on to

existing mounts that are on the seats

and door frames of the non-U.S.

certified version of the vehicle. J.K.

additionally acknowledged that the

reference to rear seat belts in the

petition was in error since the 1995

Ferrari F50 has no rear seat. With

respect to the FMVSS No. 214

compliance issue raised by Fiat, J.K.

stated that the door beams in the U.S.

certified 1995 Ferrari F50 are bolt-on

components that can be easily installed

on the non-U.S. certified version of the

vehicle without the need for fabrication

or welding.

NHTSA has reviewed each of the

issues that Fiat has raised regarding

J.K.’s petition. NHTSA believes that

J.K.’s responses adequately address each

of those issues. NHTSA further notes

that the modifications described by J.K.

are consistent with its finding that a

non-U.S. certified 1995 Fiat F50 is

‘‘capable of being readily altered to

comply with all Federal motor vehicle

safety standards.’’

NHTSA has accordingly decided to

grant the petition.

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. VSP–226 is the

eligibility number assigned to vehicles

admissible under this decision.

Final Decision

Accordingly, on the basis of the

foregoing, NHTSA hereby decides that

1995 Ferrari F50 passenger cars not

originally manufactured to comply with

all applicable Federal motor vehicle

safety standards are substantially

similar to 1995 Ferrari F50 passenger

cars originally manufactured for

importation into and sale in the United

States and certified under 49 U.S.C.

30115, and are 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 CAR 593.8; delegations of authority

at 49 CAR 1.50 and 501.8.