63908 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 207 / Wednesday, October 25, 2000 / Notices

Copies may be provided to the audience

at the discretion of the participant.

(7) Statements made by the FAA and

JAA are intended to facilitate discussion

of issues or to clarify issues. Any

statement made during the meeting by

an official is not intended to be, and

should not be construed as, a position

of the FAA or JAA.

(8) The meeting is designed to solicit

public views and more complete

information on proposed harmonization

initiatives. Therefore, the meeting will

be conducted in an informal and

nonadversarial manner. No individual

will be subject to cross-examination by

any other participant; however, panel

members may ask questions to clarify a

statement and to ensure a complete and

accurate record.

Issued in Washington, DC, on October 18,

2000.

Brenda D. Courtney,

Manager, Aircraft and Airport Rules Division.

[FR Doc. 00–27333 Filed 10–24–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

Petition for Waiver of Compliance

In accordance with part 211 of Title

49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR),

notice is hereby given that the Federal

Railroad Administration (FRA) received

a request for a waiver of compliance

from certain requirements of its safety

regulations. The individual petition is

described below including, the party

seeking relief, the regulatory provisions

involved, the nature of the relief being

requested, and the petitioner’s

arguments in favour of relief.

Texas Parks and Wildlife

[Docket Number FRA–2000–7270]

Texas Parks and Wildlife (TPW) seeks

a permanent waiver of compliance from

49 CFR 232.17(b)(2) to extend the clean,

oil, test, and stencil (COT&S) period

from 15 to 48 months on passenger cars

they operate equipped with UC and L

type air brakes. TPW operates the Texas

State Railroad between Rusk and

Palestine, Texas. They have two cars

equipped with L type brakes and the

rest have UC type brakes. Section

232.17(b)(2) requires that brake

equipment on passenger cars must be

clean, repaired, lubricated and tested as

often as necessary to maintain it in a

safe and suitable condition for service

but not less frequently than as required

in Standard S–045 in the Manual of

Standards and Recommended Practices

of the Association of American

Railroads. Standard S–045, A-III–256,

Section 2.1.2, requires a COT&S every

15 months for this brake equipment.

TPW has concluded that a car that runs

on a passenger railroad using a 15

month cycle would be legal for 10,800

hours. TPW has calculated that if the

equipment is in service only 60 percent

of the 15 month cycle, then only 6,480

hours would be used. TPW claims that

all of their annual runs, including

specials and school runs, only total

1,100 hours a year. Therefore, TPW

would like to extend the COT&S time

period to 48 months, which would be

less than 4,400 hours of actual service

time.

Interested parties are invited to

participate in these proceedings by

submitting written views, data, or

comments. FRA does not anticipate

scheduling a public hearing in

connection with these proceedings since

the facts do not appear to warrant a

hearing. If any interested party desires

an opportunity for oral comment, they

should notify FRA in writing, before the

end of the comment period and specify

the basis for their request.

All communications concerning these

proceedings should identify the

appropriate docket number (e.g., Waiver

Petition Docket Number FRA–2000–

7270) and must be submitted in

triplicate to the Docket Clerk, DOT

Central Docket Management Facility,

Room PL–401, Washington, DC. 20590–

0001. Communications received within

45 days of the date of this notice will

be considered by FRA before final

action is taken. Comments received after

that date will be considered as far as

practicable. All written communications

concerning these proceedings are

available for examination during regular

business hours (9:00 a.m.–5:00 p.m.) at

DOT Central Docket Management

Facility, Room PL–401 (Plaza Level),

400 Seventh Street S.W., Washington,

DC. All documents in the public docket

are also available for inspection and

copying on the Internet at the docket

facility’s Web site at http://dms.dot.gov.

Issued in Washington, DC, on October 18,

2000.

Grady C. Cothen, Jr.,

Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety

Standards and Program Development.

[FR Doc. 00–27318 Filed 10–24–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–06–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

Notice of Application for Approval of

Discontinuance or Modification of a

Railroad Signal System or Relief From

the Requirements of Title 49 Code of

Federal Regulations Part 236

Pursuant to Title 49 Code of Federal

Regulations (CFR) part 235 and 49

U.S.C. App. 26, the following railroads

have petitioned the Federal Railroad

Administration (FRA) seeking approval

for the discontinuance or modification

of the signal system or relief from the

requirements of 49 CFR part 236 as

detailed below.

Docket No. FRA–2000–7634.

Applicant: Burlington Northern and

Santa Fe Railway, Mr. William G.

Peterson, Director Signal Engineering,

4515 Kansas Avenue, Kansas City,

Kansas 66106.

Burlington Northern and Santa Fe

Railway (BNSF) seeks conditional relief

from the requirements of Title 49 CFR,

part 236, § 236.102(b) of the Rules,

Standards, and Instructions, for the

entire BNSF system, to the extent that

those searchlight signal mechanisms,

that have circuitry designed to

automatically detect a sticking

mechanism and automatically protect

for the safety of train movements, not be

required to be inspected and the

mechanical movement of the

mechanism observed operating to all

positions, at least once every six

months.

Applicants’ justification for relief:

Stuck mechanism circuits used in Vital

Harmon Logic Controllers (VHLC),

Wayside Interface Units (WIU),

Microprocessor based coded track and

control equipment, and relay based

stuck mechanism circuits, continuously

monitor searchlight mechanisms.

Any interested party desiring to

protest the granting of an application

shall set forth specifically the grounds

upon which the protest is made and

contain a concise statement of the

interest of the Protestant in the

proceeding. Additionally, one copy of

the protest shall be furnished to the

applicant at the address listed above.

All communications concerning this

proceeding should be identified by the

docket number and must be submitted

to the Docket Clerk, DOT Central Docket

Management Facility, Room PL–401,

Washington, DC 20590–0001.

Communications received within 45

days of the date of this notice will be

considered by FRA before final action is

taken. Comments received after that

date will be considered as far as

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 207 / Wednesday, October 25, 2000 / Notices 63909

practicable. All written communications

concerning these proceedings are

available for examination during regular

business hours (9 am–5 pm) at the above

address. All documents in the public

docket are also available for inspection

and copying on the internet at the

docket facility’s web sit at http://

dms.dot.gov.

FRA expects to be able to determine

these matters without an oral hearing.

However, if a specific request for an oral

hearing is accompanied by a showing

that the party is unable to adequately

present his or her position by written

statements, an application may be set

for public hearing.

Issued in Washington, D.C. on October 18,

2000.

Grady C. Cothen, Jr.,

Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety

Standards and Program Development.

[FR Doc. 00–27317 Filed 10–24–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–06–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA–2000–7966]

Notice of Receipt of Petition for

Decision That Nonconforming 1996

Plymouth Voyager Multi-Purpose

Passenger Vehicles Are Eligible for

Importation

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of receipt of petition for

decision that nonconforming 1996

Plymouth Voyager multi-purpose

passenger vehicles (MPVs) are eligible

for importation.

SUMMARY: This notice announces receipt

by the National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration (NHTSA) of a petition

for a decision that a 1996 Plymouth

Voyager manufactured for the European

and other foreign markets that was not

originally manufactured to comply with

all applicable Federal motor vehicle

safety standards is eligible for

importation into the United States

because: (1) It is substantially similar to

a vehicle that was originally

manufactured for sale in the United

States and that was certified by its

manufacturer as complying with the

safety standards, and (2) it is capable of

being readily altered to conform to the

standards.

DATES: The closing date for comments

on the petition is November 24, 2000.

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 9 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.

Wallace Environmental Testing

Laboratories, Inc., of Houston, Texas

(‘‘Wallace’’) (Registered Importer 90–

005) has petitioned NHTSA to decide

whether 1996 Plymouth Voyager MPVs

manufactured for the European and

other foreign markets are eligible for

importation into the United States. The

vehicle which Wallace believes is

substantially similar is the 1996

Plymouth Voyager that was

manufactured for sale in the United

States and certified by its manufacturer,

Chrysler Corporation, as conforming to

all applicable Federal motor vehicle

safety standards.

The petitioner claims that it carefully

compared the non-U.S. certified 1996

Plymouth Voyager to its U.S. certified

counterpart, and found the two vehicles

to be substantially similar with respect

to compliance with most Federal motor

vehicle safety standards.

Wallace submitted information with

its petition intended to demonstrate that

the non-U.S. certified 1996 Plymouth

Voyager, as originally manufactured,

conforms to many Federal motor vehicle

safety standards in the same manner as

its U.S. certified counterpart, or is

capable of being readily altered to

conform to those standards.

Specifically, the petitioner claims that

the non-U.S. certified 1996 Plymouth

Voyager is identical to its U.S. certified

counterpart with respect to compliance

with Standard Nos. 102 Transmission

Shift Lever Sequence. * * *, 103

Defrosting and Defogging Systems, 104

Windshield Wiping and Washing

Systems, 105 Hydraulic Brake Systems,

106 Brake Hoses, 113 Hood Latch

Systems, 114 Theft Protection, 116

Brake Fluid, 118 Power-Operated

Window Systems, 119 New Pneumatic

Tires, 124 Accelerator Control Systems,

201 Occupant Protection in Interior

Impact, 202 Head Restraints, 204

Steering Control Rearward

Displacement, 205 Glazing Materials,

206 Door Locks and Door Retention

Components, 207 Seating Systems, 209

Seat Belt Assemblies, 210 Seat Belt

Assembly Anchorages, 212 Windshield

Retention, 214 Side Impact Protection,

216 Roof Crush Resistance, 219

Windshield Zone Intrusion, and 302

Flammability of Interior Materials. 

Petitioner also contends that the

vehicle is capable of being readily

altered to meet the following standards,

in the manner indicated:

Standard No. 101 Controls and

Displays: Replacement of the

speedometer/odometer with a unit

calibrated in miles per hour.

Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective

Devices and Associated Equipment:

Replacement of the headlight and

taillight assemblies with components

that conform to the standard.

Standard No. 111 Rearview Mirrors:

Inscription of the required warning

statement on the passenger side

rearview mirror.

Standard No. 120 Tire Selection and

Rims: Installation of a tire information

placard.

Standard No. 208 Occupant Crash

Protection: (a) Replacement of the

driver’s seat belt latch and installation

of a seat belt warning buzzer system that

conforms to the standard; (b)

replacement of the driver’s and

passenger’s side air bag systems and

knee bolsters with U.S.-model

components on vehicles that are not

already so equipped. The petitioner

states that the vehicle is equipped with

Type 2 seat belts in all front, center and

rear designated seating positions, and