66584 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 215 / Monday, November 6, 2000 / Notices

accomplishments. The methods could

include billboards, public service

announcements, and published

materials. It is also important to deliver

this information in the language of the

targeted group.

3. Trains and retrains child passenger

safety professionals, police officers, fire

and emergency medical personnel, and

other educators concerning all aspects

of child restraint use. At a minimum,

States should include in the application

a description of or reference to the

curricula that the State will use to train

and retrain child passenger safety

experts to reach the targeted population

and expected accomplishments.

All persons selected for training and

retraining as child passenger safety

professionals should achieve and

maintain at least some minimum

standards of expertise. In collaboration

with several partners, NHTSA has

developed several model curricula

including: ‘‘Mobilizing America to

Buckle Up Children’’ and ‘‘Operation

Kids’’ for law enforcement officers; and

the ‘‘Standardized Child Passenger

Safety Training Program’’ for child

passenger safety professional

candidates. States are not restricted to

using only these curricula, but States are

encouraged to incorporate the learning

objectives of these courses into the

training and retraining provided to child

passenger safety experts. Funding for

this grant program is intended to help

States develop and sustain adequate

cadres of persons with technical

expertise in child passenger protection

who will directly serve the public

through child safety seat clinics,

checkpoints, workshops, fitting stations

and other training and educational

opportunities.

A. Certification

The State must submit certifications

that: (i) It will use the funds awarded

under this grant program exclusively to

implement a child passenger protection

program in accordance with the

requirements of Section 2003(b) of P.L.

105–178 (TEA–21); (ii) It will

administer the funds in accordance with

49 CFR Part 18 and OMB Circular A–87;

and (iii) It will provide to the NHTSA

Regional Administrator no later than 15

months after the grant award a report of

activities carried out with grant funds

and accomplishments to date.

B. Eligibility Requirements

Eligibility is limited to the 50 States,

the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico,

the U.S. Territories (which include the

Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa

and the Commonwealth of the Northern

Mariana Islands) through their

Governor’s Office of Highway Safety,

and Indian Tribes through the Secretary

of the Interior.

Award Procedures

The amount available for this program

in fiscal year 2001 is $7,500,000. In FY

2000, NHTSA awarded $7.5 million to

47 states, the District of Columbia,

Puerto Rico, 4 U.S. Territories and the

Indian Nations. A new application is

required to seek an award of fiscal year

2001 funds. Awards to applicants

meeting the requirements of this notice

will be made based upon the formula

used for Section 402 apportionment,

subject to the availability of funds. The

amount awarded to each State

qualifying under this program shall be

determined by multiplying the amount

appropriated for this grant program for

the fiscal year by the ratio that the

amount of funds apportioned to each

such State under 23 U.S.C. 402 for the

fiscal year bears to the total amount of

funds apportioned to all such States

under Section 402 for such fiscal year.

Applicants will be required to submit to

NHTSA within 30 days of notification

that an award is made, a program cost

summary (HS Form 217) obligating the

Section 2003(b) funds to child passenger

protection education programs. The

Federal funding share may not exceed

80% of the program cost, and States

should clearly identify their share in the

program cost summary (HS Form 217).

Each State must submit one original

and two copies of the application

package to the appropriate NHTSA

Regional Administrator. Only complete

application packages submitted by a

Governor’s Highway Safety

Representative and received on or

before December 15, 2000 will be

considered for funding in fiscal year

2001.

Report Requirements

A State that receives a grant must

submit a report describing the activities

carried out with the grant funds and the

accomplishments to date. The report

must be submitted to the NHTSA

Regional Administrator no later than 15

months after the grant is awarded.

At a minimum, the report must

contain the following:

(a) Describe how the State’s child

passenger protection program is

supporting efforts to prevent deaths and

injuries to children.

(b) For the education component, the

report must identify program

accomplishments, such as:

• A summary of the public education

methods developed and how programs

were delivered to the targeted

population.

• The number of public education

messages distributed (e.g. public service

announcements or printed materials)

and the type of audience targeted by

those messages (e.g. minority or lowincome communities);

• The number of child safety seat

clinics or check-ups performed, and the

number of fitting stations established. A

State must also include the locations of

child safety seat clinics, check-ups and

fitting stations, specifying the target

population served.

(c) For the training component, the

report must include:

• The number of and type of training

classes conducted and the individuals

or groups trained (e.g. representing

minority, rural or low-income

communities);

• A description of or reference to the

curricula that were used to train and

retrain child passenger safety experts.

• The number of child passenger

safety technicians and instructors

certified during the grant period.

NHTSA Publications Available To

Support Public Education

A number of NHTSA publications are

available through the Traffic Safety

Materials Catalog that address child

passenger safety program topics. These

materials may be ordered from the

NHTSA web site at >HTTP://

WWW.NHTSA.DOT.GOV< or

contacting the Media and Marketing

Division, NTS–21 by fax at (202) 493–

2062.

Issued on: November 1, 2000.

Sue Bailey,

Administrator, National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration.

[FR Doc. 00–28344 Filed 11–3–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA 2000–8201; Notice 1]

Subaru of America, Inc., Receipt of

Application for Decision of

Inconsequential Noncompliance

Regarding Headlamp Lens Marking

Subaru of America, Inc., of Cherry

Hill, New Jersey, has determined that

certain headlamp lens assemblies

manufactured by North American

Lighting, Inc., are not in full compliance

with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety

Standard (FMVSS) No. 108, ‘‘Lamps,

reflective devices, and associated

equipment.’’ Pursuant to 49 U.S.C.

30118(d) and 30120(h), Subaru has

petitioned for a determination that this

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 215 / Monday, November 6, 2000 / Notices 66585

noncompliance is inconsequential to

motor vehicle safety and has filed an

appropriate report pursuant to 49 CFR

part 573, ‘‘Defect and Noncompliance

Reports.’’

This notice of receipt of an

application is published under 49

U.S.C. 30118 and 30120 and does not

represent any agency decision or other

exercise of judgment concerning the

merits of the application.

FMVSS No. 108 establishes the

performance and equipment

requirements for lamps, reflective

devices and associated equipment.

Under S7.5(g) of FMVSS No. 108, the

lens of each replaceable bulb headlamp

shall bear permanent marking in front of

each replaceable light source with

which it is equipped that states the

official light source type designation.

Under S7.8.5.3(f)(2), the lens shall

have a mark or markings identifying the

optical axis of the headlamp visible

from the front of the headlamp when

installed on the vehicle, to assure

proper horizontal and vertical

alignment.

Approximately 87 headlamp lens

assemblies manufactured by North

American Lighting, Inc., for use in

Model Year 2000 Subaru Legacy and

Outback vehicles were installed on

production vehicles from October 5,

1999, through December 5, 1999. During

the manufacturing process, ‘‘headlamp

assemblies were assembled with lens

covers with the wrong marking

specification required under FMVSS

108, S7.5(g) and FMVSS 108,

S7.8.5.3(f)(2).’’

Because there are two different

headlamp designs, a 2-bulb version and

a 1-bulb version, both the same shape,

there are two different lenses that are

molded. The manufacturing process for

assembling these headlamps

mismatched the 2-bulb lens and 1-bulb

lens assemblies resulting in the

noncompliance.

Subaru stated that the installation of

the incorrect lens in the 2-bulb and 1-

bulb headlamp assemblies does not

result in performance variations in beam

light patterns resulting in the

noncompliances with FMVSS 108.

Subaru’s supporting data, views and

arguments are as follows:

(1) Headlamp aiming performed during the

manufacturing process does not rely on lens

marking for beam pattern alignment. The

result is proper alignment regardless of the

mismatch in headlamp assembly lens.

(2) The rate of replacement for headlamp

bulbs within the 3/36 warranty period is 0.6

percent. The remaining parts demand for

headlamp bulbs is due to collision which

results in purchase and installation of new

headlamp assemblies not containing the

noncompliance.

(3) Installation of replacement headlamp

bulbs is outlined in the Service Manual for

Subaru Legacy vehicles. The Service Manual

procedure for alignment of the headlamp

does not rely on the markings found in

noncompliance, but rather references the

center marking on the bulb.

(4) Incorrect lens assembly installation

results in the following light performance

variations:

2-bulb lens on 1-bulb assembly: slight

decrease in long range visibility, but within

FMVSS performance requirements.

1-bulb lens on 2-bulb assembly: Slight

broadening of the beam pattern. Vertical

alignment specification variation does not

exceed 0.57 degrees plus/minus specified

aiming.

(5) There is a small possibility that

consumers would purchase replacement

bulbs for non-dealer installation based on the

incorrect marking. However, the incorrect

bulb will not install in the headlamp

assembly irrespective of the incorrect

marking. Additionally, the owner’s manual

provides the correct specification for

replacement bulbs required.

Subaru also submitted data which

show the difference in beam patterns of

the four possible bulb combinations in

the two lamp housings. The data are in

the docket for this application.

The petitioner has indicated that the

noncompliances will not result in any

safety, reliability or serviceability

concern for the operator of a subject

motor vehicle.

Interested persons are invited to

submit written data, views, and

arguments on the application described

above. Comments should refer to the

docket number and be submitted to :

U.S. Department of Transportation,

Docket Management, Room PL–401, 400

Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC

20590. It is requested that two copies be

submitted.

All comments received before the

close of business on the closing date

indicated below will be considered. The

application and supporting materials,

and all comments received after the

closing date, will also be filed and will

be considered to the extent possible.

When the application is granted or

denied, the notice will be published in

the Federal Register pursuant to the

authority indicated below. Comment

closing date: December 6, 2000.

(49 U.S.C. 301118, 301120; delegations of

authority at 49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8)

Issued on: November 1, 2000.

Stephen R. Kratzke,

Associate Administrator for Safety

Performance Standards.

[FR Doc. 00–28343 Filed 11–03–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Surface Transportation Board

[STB Docket No. AB–290 (Sub–No. 209X)]

Camp Lejeune Railroad Company—

Discontinuance of Service

Exemption—in Onslow County, NC

On October 17, 2000, Camp Lejeune

Railroad Company (CL), a wholly

owned subsidiary of Norfolk Southern

Railway Company, filed with the

Surface Transportation Board (Board) a

petition under 49 U.S.C. 10502 for

exemption from the provisions of 49

U.S.C. 10903 to discontinue service over

5.5 miles of rail line extending between

milepost CK–2.5 at Camp Lejeune and

milepost CK–8.0 at Marine Junction, in

Onslow County, NC. CL operated the

line under a lease from the United

States Government that expired in

August 1999. The line traverses U.S.

Postal Service Zip Codes 28542 and

28547.

The line does not contain federally

granted rights-of-way. However, the

right-of-way is owned by the United

States Government. Any documentation

in CL’s possession will be made

available promptly to those requesting

it.

The interest of railroad employees

will be protected by the conditions set

forth in Oregon Short Line R.

Co. Abandonment Goshen, 360 I.C.C.

91 (1979).

By issuing this notice, the Board is

instituting an exemption proceeding

pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 10502(b). A final

decision will be issued by February 2,

2001.

Any offer of financial assistance

(OFA) under 49 CFR 1152.27(b)(2) will

be due no later than 10 days after

service of a decision granting the

petition for exemption. Each OFA must

be accompanied by a $1,000 filing fee.

See 49 CFR 1002.2(f)(25).

All filings in response to this notice

must refer to STB Docket No. AB–290

(Sub-No. 209X) and must be sent to: (1)

Surface Transportation Board, Office of

the Secretary, Case Control Unit, 1925 K

Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20423–

0001; and (2) James R. Paschall, Norfolk

Southern Railway Company, Three

Commercial Place, Norfolk, VA 23510.

Replies to the CL petition are due on or

before November 27, 2000.

Persons seeking further information

concerning abandonment and

discontinuance procedures may contact

the Board’s Office of Public Services at

(202) 565–1592 or refer to the full

abandonment or discontinuance

regulations at 49 CFR part 1152.

Questions concerning environmental