Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 243 / Thursday, December 18, 1997 / Notices 66401

1 Delta V is the rapid change of a vehicle’s speed

due to a crash. A 12 mph delta V is the equivalent

of a vehicle traveling at 12 mph crashing into an

immovable solid object such as a heavy concrete

wall.

‘‘Personnel Administration Forms,’’

OMB Number 3207–0005.

DATES: Written comments on this

proposed action regarding the collection

of information must be submitted by

February 17, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Address all comments

concerning this notice to Edward H.

Clarke, Desk Officer for Panama Canal

Commission, Office of Information and

Regulatory Affairs, Room 10202, New

Executive Office Building, Office of

Management and Budget, Washington,

D.C. 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ruth Huff, Office of the Secretary,

Panama Canal Commission, 202–634–

6441.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44

U.S.C. 3501–3520), Federal agencies

must obtain approval from the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB) for each

collection of information they conduct

or sponsor. Collection of information is

defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR

1 1320.3(c). Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

requires Federal agencies to provide a

60-day notice in the Federal Register,

and otherwise consult with members of

the public and affected agencies

concerning each proposed collection of

information, by soliciting comments to:

(a) evaluate whether the proposed

collection of information is necessary

for the proper performance of the

functions of the agency, including

whether the information shall have

practical utility; (b) evaluate the

accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the

burden of the proposed collection of

information; (c) enhance the quality,

utility, and clarity of the information to

be collected; and (d) minimize the

burden of the collection of information

on those who are to respond, including

through the use of automated collection

techniques or other forms of information

technology.

Title: Personnel Administration

Forms.

Type of Request: Revision of a

currently approved collection.

Background: The information

requested is authorized by 35 Code of

Federal Regulations (CFR), Parts 251

and 253, and sections 3652, 3654, and

3661–3664 of Title 22, United States

Code. The information is needed to

determine the qualifications, suitability

and availability of applicants for Federal

employment in the Panama Canal area

so U.S. Federal agencies can be supplied

with elegibles to fill vacant positions.

Abstract: On December 30, 1981, PCC

requested OMB approval for a collection

of information entitled ‘‘Personnel

Administration Forms.’’ OMB approved

this collection for use through January

31, 1985 and assigned it OMB Number

3207–0005. On December 17, 1984, PCC

requested another extension and

received OMB approval and use through

March 31, 1988. Prior to the expiration

of the collection in subsequent years,

PCC continued requesting approval for

a revision of the collection and received

approval through July 31, 1991,

September 30, 1994, and February 28,

1998. The information requested is used

by Recruitment and Examining Division

(HRR) employees performing examining

and suitability duties, by subject-matter

experts on rating panels, and by agency

officials making selections to fill

vacancies.

Estimated Burden: The estimated

burden of providing the information

varies, depending upon the applicant’s

individual circumstances. The burden

time for a full application is estimated

to vary from 40 to 300 minutes with an

average of 120 minutes per response,

including supplemental qualifications

forms when required, and 10 to 60

minutes with an average of 30 minutes

to update applications already on file.

Estimated Number of Respondents:

7453.

Total Annual Reporting Hour Burden:

9082.

Respondents: Applicants for

employment.

Frequency of Collection: When

persons apply or update applications.

Jacinto Wong,

Chief Information Officer, Senior Official for

Information Resources Management.

[FR Doc. 97–33003 Filed 12–17–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3640–04–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration (NHTSA)

Denial of Motor Vehicle Defect Petition

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration (NHTSA),

Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Denial of motor vehicle defect

petition.

SUMMARY: This notice sets forth the

reasons for the denial of a June 19, 1997

petition submitted to NHTSA under 49

U.S.C. 30162 by Donald Friedman,

requesting that the agency commence a

proceeding to determine the existence of

defects related to motor vehicle safety in

the air bag systems and the two-point

automatic seat belt systems in all

vehicles manufactured since 1987. After

reviewing the petition and other

information, NHTSA has concluded that

further expenditure of the agency’s

investigative resources on the

allegations in the petition does not

appear to be warranted. The agency

accordingly has denied the petition.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. Thomas Cooper, Chief, Vehicle

Integrity Branch, Office of Defects

Investigation (ODI), NHTSA, 400

Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC

20590. Telephone: (202) 366–5218.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June

19, 1997, Mr. Donald Friedman

submitted a petition requesting the

agency to investigate ‘‘the safety

performance of certain motor vehicles

built in compliance with the automatic

crash protection requirements of Federal

Motor Vehicle Safety Standards

(FMVSS) No. 208; ‘Occupant crash

protection.’ ’’ The petition concerns

vehicles with ‘‘driver air bags built from

1987 to the present.’’ It also ‘‘concerns

some automobiles with two-point

automatic belts.’’

The petition alleges two distinct

defects in the subject vehicles. One

alleged defect involves the safety of

those individuals who are of a ‘‘short

stature (around 5 feet tall)’’ who

position the seat so that they can both

reach the pedals and see ‘‘safely’’

through the windshield. By positioning

themselves in such a manner, they may

be very close to the air bag. The

petitioner alleges that this positioning,

when combined with air bags which

deploy at a delta V 1 of 12 miles per

hour (mph) and less and which deploy

with aggressive force, can cause serious

and fatal injuries.

The petition alleges a second defect in

vehicles with automatic seat belts that

restrain only the torso portion of the

body. It alleges that if shorter people

‘‘ride without the lap belt and with their

seat in a rearward position’’ they are

‘‘likely to submarine’’ in a crash, and

that [‘‘w]hen this happens, the twopoint belt can catch the occupant’s chin

and cause serious neck injuries

including paraplegia or quadriplegia.’’

NHTSA is denying the petition for the

following reasons:

I. Alleged ‘‘Aggressive Air Bags’’

The petition covers all vehicles with

driver side air bags built since 1987.

Essentially, this includes all vehicles

sold with air bags in the United States.

Previously, NHTSA studied this class of

vehicles and found that the performance
66402 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 243 / Thursday, December 18, 1997 / Notices

of the air bag systems in crashes

resulted in a significant reduction in

fatalities and serious injuries. The

agency’s findings from this study of the

‘‘real-world’’ performance of air bag

systems are contained in its third Report

to Congress, ‘‘Effectiveness of Occupant

Protection Systems and Their Use,’’

December 1996. More recently, the

agency has estimated that as of

November 1, 1997, approximately 2620

lives have been saved by air bags.

ODI recently conducted a review of

air bag fatalities and the ‘‘real-world’’

crash performance of air bags in

evaluating a petition from the Center for

Auto Safety (CAS) requesting the agency

to conduct a defect investigation of

certain specified vehicles. CAS alleged

that these vehicles were overrepresented in driver-side air bag

fatalities, and identified low speed

deployment (less than 12 mph delta V)

and aggressive deployment as prime

contributing factors. In its review of

‘‘real-world’’ crash data, the agency

compared the performance of the

vehicles identified in the CAS petition

to the performance of other vehicles

with driver-side air bags and found that

some risk of a serious or fatal injury to

an out-of-position occupant is present in

any air bag-equipped vehicle. Data from

the agency’s National Accident

Sampling System (NASS) indicated that

the air bags in many vehicles deploy

during impacts of less than 10 mph

change of speed. Data provided by the

Insurance Institute for Highway Safety

(IIHS) showed that the vehicles that

were the subject of the CAS petition had

a rate of air bag deployments per 100

crashes that was similar to that of many

other vehicles. The agency found that

the subject vehicles did not show a

tendency toward excessive air bag

deployments. NHTSA concluded that

further investigation of these vehicles

was unlikely to result in a

determination that the air bag systems

in the vehicles identified in the petition

contain safety-related defects as alleged

by the petitioner, and that a further

commitment of agency resources in this

effort was not warranted. The denial

decision is published at 62 FR 41477

(July 28, 1997).

Mr. Friedman has not provided in his

petition any new evidence to suggest the

existence of a vehicle design defect that

creates an unreasonable risk to motor

vehicle safety. His petition is similar to

the CAS petition in that he also has

identified low speed deployment and

aggressive deployment of air bags as

alleged defects. However, Mr.

Friedman’s petition is far broader in

scope than CAS’, in that it covers

virtually all vehicles equipped with air

bags. Because NHTSA has already

concluded that it could not identify a

defect trend in the smaller set of specific

vehicle models identified in the CAS

petition, it follows that it is even less

likely that an agency investigation

would identify a defect trend in the

larger group of vehicles identified by

Mr. Friedman.

The agency has taken or proposed a

number of actions to reduce the risk of

driver injury from air bags. NHTSA

presently permits individuals with valid

reasons (such as a medical reason) to

request the agency’s Chief Counsel to

exercise prosecutorial discretion and

allow a dealer or repair shop to

deactivate their vehicles’ air bag[s].

Also, the agency has issued a final rule

(62 FR 62405 (November 21, 1997)) that

will exempt dealers and repair

businesses from the statutory

prohibition against making federallyrequired safety equipment inoperative

so that, beginning January 19, 1998, they

may install retrofit manual on-off

switches for air bags in vehicles owned

by or used by persons in specified risk

groups whose requests for switches have

been approved by the agency.

Both NHTSA and the motor vehicle

industry are presently providing vast

amounts of information about the safe

use of vehicles with air bags to the

general public, through the print media,

radio and television. Also, all vehicle

manufacturers either have sent or are in

the process of sending letters to owners

of vehicles with air bags to supplement

information that already is provided in

warnings on the sun visor and in the

owner’s manual. The messages alert

owners to the dangers of air bags and

inform them of the proper procedures

for occupying a seating position that is

protected by an air bag.

II. Alleged ‘‘Submarining’’ in Vehicles

With Two Point Automatic Seat Belt

Systems

FMVSS No. 208 has required passive

restraints in at least a percentage of

passenger motor vehicles manufactured

since September 1, 1986. Starting with

MY 1987, manufacturers were required

to phase in automatic occupant

restraints to meet specified injury

criteria. Although most manufacturers

installed automatic seat belts in the

early years of the passive restraint

requirement, in more recent years air

bags have become the more popular

form of passive restraint. Beginning

with MY 1990, all vehicles were

required to meet the automatic restraint

injury criteria and manufacturers began

to make significant numbers of vehicles

with driver air bags. Then in 1991, the

Intermodal Surface Transportation

Efficiency Act (‘‘ISTEA’’) directed

NHTSA to amend FMVSS 208 to require

air bags as the form of automatic crash

protection in light vehicles. As

amended, Standard No. 208 requires the

installation of air bags in all passenger

cars manufactured on or after September

1, 1997, and all light trucks

manufactured on or after September 1,

1998.

Mr. Friedman’s petition is premised

on the assumption that the covered

vehicles were ‘‘built in compliance with

the automatic crash protection

requirements of [FMVSS No. 208].’’

Until FMVSS No. 208 was amended

pursuant to ISTEA, the standard gave

manufacturers the option of providing

‘‘two-point’automatic seat belt systems

that included a combination of an

automatic shoulder harness and a

manual lap belt. Because manufacturers

were legally authorized to meet the

standard with this combination of

equipment, NHTSA cannot conclude

that two-point automatic belt systems

that meet the performance requirements

of the standard when operated as

specified are ‘‘defective’’ if they are not

operated as specified.

Furthermore, alleged ‘‘submarining’’

by short individuals who ‘‘ride without

the lap belt and with their seat in a

rearward position’’ normally will not

occur if those individuals use the

manual lap belts in their vehicles, in

accordance with instructions.

Individuals who find that they either

cannot see properly or cannot reach the

foot controls due to their height and/or

the design of the vehicle seating system

may avail themselves of certain vehicle

modifications to correct the problem.

Very short individuals may consider

sitting on a booster pad to raise their

seating position and/or contacting a

dealer to have the vehicle fitted with a

device to extend the foot pedals. Sitting

on a booster pad does not reduce the

protection that the vehicle’s restraint

system (the air bag and the safety belt)

provides.

All manufacturers presently provide

warnings to owners about the need to

fasten manual safety belts despite the

presence of an automatic restraint

system. Warnings are located on the

vehicle sun visor and in the owner’s

manual. Furthermore, NHTSA is

conducting an extensive public

education campaign to encourage the

use of manual seat belts, and also is

encouraging ‘‘primary’’ enforcement of

state mandatory seat belt use laws. The

agency anticipates that these measures

will increase the use of manual lap belts

in vehicles that are equipped with ‘‘twopoint’’ automatic seat belts.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 243 / Thursday, December 18, 1997 / Notices 66403

For the foregoing reasons, further

expenditure of the agency’s

investigative resources on the

allegations in the petition does not

appear to be warranted. Therefore, the

petition is denied.

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30162 (d); delegations

of authority at CFR 1.50 and 501.8.

Issued on: December 9, 1997.

Kenneth N. Weinstein,

Associate Administrator for Safety

Assurance.

[FR Doc. 97–33032 Filed 12–17–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service

Proposed Collection; Comment

Request for Notice 97–65

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS),

Treasury.

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, Pub.

L. 104–13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)).

Currently, the IRS is soliciting

comments concerning Notice 97-65,

Income Tax Return Preparer Penalties—

1997 Federal Income Tax Returns Due

Diligence Requirements for Earned

Income Credit (EIC).

DATES: Written comments should be

received on or before February 17, 1998

to be assured of consideration.

ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments

to Garrick R. Shear, Internal Revenue

Service, room 5571, 1111 Constitution

Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Requests for additional information or

copies of the information collection

should be directed to Carol Savage,

(202) 622–3945, Internal Revenue

Service, room 5569, 1111 Constitution

Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Title: Income Tax Return Preparer

Penalties—1997 Federal Income Tax

Returns Due Diligence Requirements for

Earned Income Credit (EIC).

OMB Number: 1545–1570.

Notice Number: Notice 97–65.

Abstract: Notice 97–65 sets forth due

diligence requirements for tax preparers

on returns involving the earned income

tax credit (EIC). The due diligence

requirements include soliciting the

information necessary to determine a

taxpayer’s eligibility for the EIC and the

amount of the EIC, and the retention of

this information.

Current Actions: There are no changes

being made to the notice at this time.

Type of Review: Extension of a

currently approved collection.

Affected Public: Business or other forprofit organizations.

Estimated Number of Respondents:

1,200,000.

Estimated Time Per Respondent: 8

minutes.

Estimated Total Annual Burden

Hours: 160,000.

The following paragraph applies to all

of the collections of information covered

by this notice:

An agency may not conduct or

sponsor, and a person is not required to

respond to, a collection of information

unless the collection of information

displays a valid OMB control number.

Books or records relating to a collection

of information must be retained as long

as their contents may become material

in the administration of any internal

revenue law. Generally, tax returns and

tax return information are confidential,

as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103.

REQUEST FOR COMMENTS: Comments

submitted in response to this notice will

be summarized and/or included in the

request for OMB approval. All

comments will become a matter of

public record.

Comments are invited on: (a) whether

the collection of information is

necessary for the proper performance of

the functions of the agency, including

whether the information shall have

practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the

agency’s estimate of the burden of the

collection of information; (c) ways to

enhance the quality, utility, and clarity

of the information to be collected; (d)

ways to minimize the burden of the

collection of information on

respondents, including through the use

of automated collection techniques or

other forms of information technology;

and (e) estimates of capital or start-up

costs and costs of operation,

maintenance, and purchase of services

to provide information.

Approved: December 10, 1997.

Garrick R. Shear,

IRS Reports Clearance Officer.

[FR Doc. 97–32962 Filed 12–17–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service

[LR–58–83]

Proposed Collection; Comment

Request for Regulation Project

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS),

Treasury.

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, Pub.

L. 104–13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)).

Currently, the IRS is soliciting

comments concerning an existing final

regulation, LR–58–83 (T.D. 7959),

Related Group Election With Respect to

Qualified Investments in Foreign Base

Company Shipping Operations

(§§ 1.955A–2 and 1.955A–3).

DATES: Written comments should be

received on or before February 17, 1998

to be assured of consideration.

ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments

to Garrick R. Shear, Internal Revenue

Service, room 5571, 1111 Constitution

Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Requests for additional information or

copies of the information collection

should be directed to Carol Savage,

(202) 622–3945, Internal Revenue

Service, room 5569, 1111 Constitution

Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Title: Related Group Election With

Respect to Qualified Investments in

Foreign Base Company Shipping

Operations.

OMB Number: 1545–0755.

Regulation Project Number: LR–58–

83.

Abstract: This regulation concerns the

election made by a related group of

controlled foreign corporations to

determine foreign base company

shipping income and qualified

investments in foreign base company

shipping operations on a related group

basis. The information required is

necessary to assure that the U.S.

shareholder correctly reports any

shipping income of its controlled

foreign corporations which is taxable to

that shareholder.

Current Actions: There is no change to

this existing regulation.