7096 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 29 / Friday, February 11, 2000 / Notices

automated collection techniques or

other forms of information technology.

Comments, to DMS or OIRA, must

contain the OMB Control Numbers of all

ICRs addressed. Comments to DMS

must contain the docket number of this

request, USCG 1999–6334. Comments to

OIRA are best assured of having their

full effect if OIRA receives them 30 or

fewer days after the publication of this

request.

Information Collection Requests

1. Title: Vessel Reporting

Requirement.

OMB Control Number: 2115–0551.

Type of Request: Extension of

currently approved collection.

Affected Public: Owners, charterers,

managing operators, or agents of U.S.

vessels.

Form(s): N/A.

Abstract: The collection of

information requires the owner,

charterer, managing operator, or agent of

a vessel of the United States to

immediately notify the Coast Guard if

there is a reason to believe that his or

her vessel may be lost or imperiled. The

person must follow up the report with

written communication submitted to the

Coast Guard within 24 hours.

Annual Estimated Burden Hours: The

estimated burden is 137 hours annually.

2. Title: Report of Oil or Hazardous

Substance Discharge.

OMB Control Number: 2115–0137.

Type of Request: Extension of a

currently approved collection.

Affected Public: Persons in charge of

vessels, onshore or offshore facilities.

Forms: N/A.

Abstract: The collection of

information requires that any person in

charge of a vessel, an onshore or

offshore facility report to the National

Response Center, as soon as he or she

has knowledge of any discharge of oil or

a hazardous substance.

Annual Estimated Burden Hours: The

estimated burden is 7,917 hours

annually.

Dated: February 4, 2000.

G.N. Naccara,

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Director of

Information and Technology.

[FR Doc. 00–3156 Filed 2–10–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Highway Administration

Environmental Impact Statement;

Obion and Dyer Counties, Tennessee

and Fulton County, Kentucky

AGENCY: Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of intent.

SUMMARY: The FHWA is issuing this

notice to advise the public that an

environmental impact statement will be

prepared for a proposed highway project

in Obion and Dyer Counties, Tennessee

and Fulton County, Kentucky.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Mark Doctor, Project Management

Engineer, Federal Highway

Administration, 640 Grassmere Park,

Suite 112, Nashville, Tennessee 37211,

Telephone: (615) 781–5788.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

FHWA, in cooperation with the

Tennessee Department of

Transportation and the Kentucky

Transportation Cabinet, will prepare an

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)

on a proposal to construct a four-lane

divided freeway in Obion and Dyer

Counties, Tennessee and Fulton County,

Kentucky. The proposed project would

involve improvements to existing

Highway US 51/State Route (SR) 3 from

the interchange with Highway US 412/

SR 20 in Dyer County, Tennessee, north

to the Purchase Parkway in Fulton

County, Kentucky, for a distance of

about 74 kilometers (46 miles).

The proposed improvement is a

section of independent utility of the

Congressionally-designated High

Priority Corridor 18, or future Interstate

69. The purpose of the corridor is to

improve international and interstate

trade and to facilitate economic

development. The proposed project

would also provide a link between two

existing full access-controlled highways

and provide for future traffic capacity

needs.

Alternatives to be considered are: (1)

Taking no action; (2) three build

alternatives consisting of upgrading

sections of existing US 51/SR 3 and

building other sections on new location;

and (3) other alternatives that may arise

from public and agency input.

Incorporated into and studied with the

various build alternatives will be design

variations of grade and alignment.

Letters describing the proposed action

and soliciting comments will be sent to

appropriate Federal, State and local

agencies, and to private organizations

and citizens who have previously

expressed or are known to have an

interest in this proposal. A public

hearing will be held upon completion of

the Draft EIS and public notice will be

given of the time and place of the

hearing. The Draft EIS will be available

for public and agency review and

comment prior to the public hearing. A

formal scoping meeting is planned.

To ensure that the full range of issues

related to this proposed action are

addressed and all significant issues

identified, comments and suggestions

are invited from all interested parties.

Comments or questions concerning this

proposed action and the EIS should be

directed to the FHWA at the address

provided above.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

Program Number 20.205, Highway Planning

and Construction. The regulations

implementing Executive Order 12372

regarding intergovernmental consultation on

Federal programs and activities apply to this

program.)

Issued on: January 26, 2000.

Charles S. Boyd,

Tennessee Division Administrator, Nashville.

[FR Doc. 00–3272 Filed 2–10–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–22–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Transit Administration

[FTA Docket No. FTA–2000–6871]

Notice of Request for the Extension of

Currently Approved Information

Collection

AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration,

DOT.

ACTION: Notice of request for comments.

SUMMARY: In accordance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this

notice announces the intention of the

Federal Transit Administration (FTA) to

request the Office of Management and

Budget (OMB) to extend the following

currently approved information

collection:49 U.S.C. Section 5312(a)

Research, Development, Demonstration

and Training Projects

DATES: Comments must be submitted

before April 11, 2000.

ADDRESSES: All written comments must

refer to the docket number that appears

at the top of this document and be

submitted to the United States

Department of Transportation,

CentralDockets Office, PL–401, 400

Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC

20590. All comments received will be

available for examination at the above

address from 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.,

e.t., Monday through Friday, except

Federal holidays. Those desiring

notification of receipt of comments must

include a self-addressed, stamped

postcard/envelope.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 49

U.S.C. Section 5312(a) Research,

Development, Demonstration and

Training Projects—Mr. Henry Nejako,

Office of Research, Demonstration and

Innovation, (202) 366–0184. Title: 49

U.S.C. Section 5312(a) Research,

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 29 / Friday, February 11, 2000 / Notices 7097

Development, Demonstration and

Training Projects (OMB Number: 2132–

0546).

BACKGROUND: 49 U.S.C. Section 5312(a)

authorizes the Secretary of

Transportation to make grants or

contracts for research, development, and

demonstration projects that will reduce

urban transportation needs, improve

mass transportation service, or help

transportation service meet the total

urban transportation needs at a

minimum cost. In carrying out the

provisions of this section, the Secretary

is also authorized to request and receive

appropriate information from any

source. The information collected is

submitted as part of the application for

grants and cooperative agreements and

is used to determine eligibility of

applicants. Collection of this

information also provides

documentation that the applicants and

recipients are meeting program

objectives and are complying with FTA

Circular 6100.1B and other Federal

requirements.

Issued: February 7, 2000.

Dorrie Y. Aldrich,

Associate Administrator for Administration.

[FR Doc. 00–3135 Filed 2–10–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–57–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA 99–6473 Notice 1]

Registered Importers; Receipt of

Applications for Determination of

Inconsequential Noncompliance

The following companies, as

registered importers under 49 U.S.C.

30141(c), imported passenger cars that

failed to comply with Federal Motor

Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No.

208, ‘‘Occupant Crash Protection’’: Auto

Enterprises, Inc., Dickson Motor Sales

and Leasing, Inc., JM Motors, Inc.,

Superior Auto Sales, Inc., Auto Import

Services, Inc., Laurek International

Trade Service, Inc., Elite Limited Auto

Sales and Leasing, Ltd., Champagne

Imports, Inc., Potsdam Importers, Inc.,

International Vehicle Importers, Inc.,

Auto King, Inc., and Liphardt and

Associates, Inc. A registered importer is

a firm recognized by the National

Highway Traffic Safety Administration

(NHTSA) as being capable of modifying

vehicles that are imported into the

United States to assure that they comply

with all applicable FMVSS’s. Under

Section 30147, registered importers are

obligated to notify owners and remedy

safety related defects and

noncompliances in these vehicles. All of

the registered importers involved except

for Liphardt and Associates, Inc., filed

appropriate reports pursuant to 49 CFR

Part 573 ‘‘Defect and Noncompliance

Reports.’’ These registered reporters

have also applied to be exempted from

the notification and remedy

requirements of Section 30118 and

30120. The basis of the applications is

that the noncompliance is

inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. This notice of receipt of these

applications 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 applications. The following passenger cars

(‘‘subject vehicles’’), certified by their

original manufacturers as complying

with all applicable Canadian Motor

Vehicle Safety Standards, do not

comply in all respects with FMVSS No.

208:

Chrysler LeBaron, 1994 and 1995 MY

Dodge Spirit, 1994 and 1995 MY

Dodge Shadow, 1994 and 1995 MY

Dodge Viper, 1994 and 1995 MY

Plymouth Sundance, 1994 and 1995 MY

Plymouth Acclaim, 1994 and 1995 MY

Description of Noncompliance

The subject vehicles imported by the

petitioners were manufactured on or

after September 1, 1993, the date on

which FMVSS No. 208 first required an

automatic restraint for both front

outboard seating positions. However,

these vehicles are equipped with a

driver side air bag and a passenger side

type 2, 3-point shoulder/lap belt which

met the standard as in effect before

September 1, 1993.

Background

Under 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A), a

motor vehicle that was not originally

manufactured to conform to all

applicable FMVSS shall be refused

admission into the United States unless

NHTSA has decided, either pursuant to

a petition from the manufacturer or

registered importer or on its own

initiative, that the motor vehicle is

substantially similar to a motor vehicle

of the same model year, originally

manufactured for importation into and

sale in the United States, and certified

under 49 U.S.C. 30115, and the vehicle

is capable of being readily altered to

conform to all applicable FMVSSs.

NHTSA has decided, on its own

initiative, that the subject motor

vehicles are substantially similar to

motor vehicles originally manufactured

for importation into and sale in the

United States, certified under 49 U.S.C.

§ 30115, and of the same model year

that they are, and capable of being

readily altered to conform to all

applicable FMVSS. See 63 FR 41617

(August 4, 1998).

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 has

been determined eligible for entry. The

subject vehicles were imported from

Canada under the VSA–1 eligibility

code, assigned to all Canadian vehicles

that the Administrator decided to be

eligible for importation. Documentation

substantiating compliance of the subject

vehicles with the FMVSS was submitted

to NHTSA after importation. NHTSA

then reviewed the submissions and, for

the vast majority of the affected

vehicles, issued a decision letter

advising that the submitted

documentation was acceptable. In

September 1995, NHTSA informed the

importers that the amended

requirements of FMVSS No. 208 had not

been met. The importers had

misunderstood FMVSS No. 208 and had

believed the passenger-side restraint

could be a manual belt when the

driver’s side was air bag equipped. This

configuration was permissible until

September 1, 1993. This provision

expired after that date, requiring

automatic restraints on both sides.

When this matter was brought to the

attention of the registered importers,

they stopped importing vehicles not

meeting FMVSS No. 208.

Arguments by Importers

A detailed chronology of the

circumstances leading to this notice is

contained in the ‘‘Notification of Defect

pursuant to 49 CFR 573 and Petition

pursuant to 49 CFR 556 for exemption

from recall based on

inconsequentiality,’’ dated September

14, 1998, submitted by Superior Auto

Sales, Inc. Several of the other registered

importers affected joined in this

petition.

A summary of petitioners’ arguments

follows:

The remedy for the affected vehicles would

be either the installation of an automatic seat

belt or passenger side air bag. Both of these

options may not increase vehicle safety.

NHTSA has recently revised the passenger

side air bag requirements, due to concerns

regarding the extensive force of the air bag

deployment. Any air bag system installed as

a remedy for the affected vehicles would not

meet the revised criteria. Thus, the remedy

would require installation of old technology

air bags. The owners of these vehicles could

even petition NHTSA for permission to

disable this safety feature.