Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 130 /Wednesday, July 8, 1998 / Notices 36989

1The line also includes an additional 14.4 miles

of side track.

Federal court or as otherwise provided

under the Privacy Act (4 U.S.C. 552a).

Dated: July 2, 1998.

Ernest R. Riutta,

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Assistant

Commandant for Operations.

[FR Doc. 98–18114 Filed 7–7–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–15–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA–98–3848; Notice 2]

Beall Trailers of Washington, Inc.;

Grant of Application for Temporary

Exemption From Federal Motor Vehicle

Safety Standard No. 224

This notice grants the application by

Beall Trailers of Washington, Inc., of

Kent, Washington, (‘‘Beall’’), a whollyowned subsidiary of Beall Corporation,

for a one-year temporary exemption

from Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No.

224 Rear Impact Protection. The basis of

the application was that compliance

would cause substantial economic

hardship to a manufacturer that has

tried in good faith to comply with the

standard.

Notice of receipt of the application

was published on May 19, 1998, and an

opportunity afforded for comment (63

FR 27618).

Beall manufactures and sells dump

body trailers. It produced a total of 311

trailers in 1997, of which 124 were

dump body types. Standard No. 224

requires, effective January 26, 1998, that

all trailers with a GVWR of 4536 Kg or

more, including dump body types, be

fitted with a rear impact guard that

conforms to Standard No. 223 Rear

impact guards. In its application, Beall

stated that ‘‘alterations may have to be

made to the trailer chassis or even

raising the dump box to provide space

for the retractable guard,’’ indicating

that a guard that retracts when the

dump body is in operation is the

solution it is seeking in order to comply.

According to Beall, the company has

‘‘placed significant resources (time and

money) towards the design of an

acceptable guard. We have involved

Montana State University professors

from their Mechanical Engineering

department. We have conducted Finite

Element Analysis and traditional

methods of design arriving at a

plastically deforming guard that meets

the standard, for nonasphalt carrying

applications.’’ The deforming guard

does not retract, thus cannot be used on

dump body trailers. Beall believed that

its problem is similar to that

experienced by other manufacturers

manufacturing dump trailers. The

company stated that ‘‘devices used in

other countries do not meet FMVSS

224.’’ It continues to study ‘‘hinged/

retractable devices’’ but must overcome

lack of space for a retracted device. The

company said that it would strive to

develop a device that would comply

with Federal requirements while an

exemption is in effect.

If an exemption is not granted, the

company argued that substantial

economic hardship will result. First, it

would lose a trailer that accounts for 40

percent of its overall production. In

addition, ‘‘some percentage of the

remaining 60% would be lost since our

customers typically purchase matching

truck mounted dump bodies which may

also be lost.’’ Beall also believed that 31

of its 63 employees would have to be

laid off if its application is denied.

Maintenance of full employment would

be in the public interest it argues.

Beall’s net income was $39,317 in 1995

and $72,213 in 1996. In the first 10

months of 1997, its net income before

income taxes was $697,040. If the

application is denied, it foresees a net

loss of $71,445 for 1998.

No comments were received on the

application.

NHTSA has analyzed the economic

and regulatory situation that confronts

Beall. The configuration of the

company’s dump trailer has presented it

with an engineering problem that it was

unable to resolve by the effective date of

the standard, even though the company

has studied devices used in other

countries. Beall anticipates arriving at a

solution within the year that its

exemption would be in effect, and the

company did not ask for the three full

year exemption permitted under the

hardship authority. Although a denial

would not create an untenable economic

situation, it would result in the

company having a net loss for 1998.

More ominously, a denial might also

have the effect of eroding the market for

the trailers that Beall could continue to

produce ‘‘since our customers typically

purchase matching truck mounted

dump bodies.’’

NHTSA agrees that maintenance of

full employment is in the public

interest. The very low volume of the

trailers that will be covered by an

exemption limits the effect on safety of

the trailers that will be produced under

the exemption without a rear underride

guard.

In consideration of the foregoing, it is

hereby found that compliance with

Standard No. 224 would cause

substantial economic hardship to a

manufacturer that has tried in good faith

to comply with the standard, and that

an exemption would be in the public

interest and consistent with motor

vehicle safety. Accordingly, Beall

Trailers of Washington, Inc., is hereby

granted NHTSA Temporary Exemption

No. 98–5 from Federal Motor Vehicle

Safety Standard No. 224 Rear Impact

Protection, 49 CFR 571.224, expiring

July 1, 1999.

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30113; delegation of

authority at 49 CFR 1.50.

Issued on: June 29, 1998.

Ricardo Martinez,

Administrator.

[FR Doc. 98–18095 Filed 7–7–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Surface Transportation Board

[STB Docket No. AB–545]

South Orient Railroad Company, Ltd.—

Abandonment and Discontinuance of

Trackage Rights—Between San Angelo

and Presidio, TX

On June 18, 1998, the South Orient

Railroad Company, Ltd. (SORC), filed an

application with the Surface

Transportation Board (Board) for

permission to abandon its San AngeloPresidio Line extending from milepost

722 near Mertzon station south of San

Angelo to approximately milepost 945.3

at Alpine Junction and from

approximately milepost 956.7 at Paisano

Junction to the end of the line at

milepost 1029.1 on the International

Bridge near Presidio, a distance of

approximately 296.4 miles; 1 and to

discontinue its trackage rights over the

Union Pacific Railroad Company’s line

extending from approximately milepost

945.3 at Alpine Junction to

approximately milepost 956.7 at Paisano

Junction, a distance of 11.4 miles, for a

total distance of approximately 307

miles in Brewster, Crane, Crockett,

Irion, Pecos, Presidio, Reagan, Tom

Green, and Upton Counties, TX. The

line includes the stations of Mertzon,

milepost 745.7; Barnhart, milepost

771.6; Big Lake, milepost 790.6; Rankin,

milepost 819.9; McCamey, milepost

838.6; Baldridge, milepost 863.8;

Sulphur Jct., milepost 869.4; Fort

Stockton, milepost 881.7; Belding,

milepost 892.9; Hovey, milepost 917.2;

Alpine, milepost 944.3; Alpine Jct.,

milepost 945.6; Paisano Jct., milepost

956.7; Paisano, milepost 956.9; Tinaja,

milepost 969.3; Plata, milepost 993.7;
36990 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 130 /Wednesday, July 8, 1998 / Notices

Casa Piedra, milepost 1002.9; and

Presidio, milepost 1026.7, and traverses

through United States Postal Service ZIP

Codes 76903, 76666, 76930, 76932,

79778, 76752, 79735, 79830, 79832, and

79845.

The line does not contain federally

granted rights-of-way. Any

documentation in SORC’s possession

will be made available promptly to

those requesting it. The applicant’s

entire case for abandonment and

discontinuance was filed with the

application.

This line of railroad has been

included in SORC’s system narrative

description in Category 1 since April 17,

1998.

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).

Any interested person may file with

the Board written comments concerning

the proposed abandonment and

discontinuance or protests (including

the protestant’s entire opposition case),

by August 3, 1998. All interested

persons should be aware that following

any abandonment of rail service and

salvage of the line, the line may be

suitable for other public use, including

interim trail use. Any request for a

public use condition under 49 U.S.C.

10905 (49 CFR 1152.28) or for a trail use

condition under 16 U.S.C. 1247(d) (49

CFR 1152.29) must be filed by August

3, 1998. Each trail use request must be

accompanied by a $150 filing fee. See 49

CFR 1002.2(f)(27). The applicant’s reply

to any opposition statements and its

response to trail use requests must be

filed by August 17, 1998. See 49 CFR

1152.26(a).

Persons opposing the proposed

abandonment and discontinuance that

wish to participate actively and fully in

the process should file a protest.

Persons who may oppose the

abandonment and discontinuance but

who do not wish to participate fully in

the process by appearing at any oral

hearings or by submitting verified

statements of witnesses containing

detailed evidence should file comments.

Persons interested only in seeking

public use or trail use conditions should

also file comments.

In addition, a commenting party or

protestant may provide:

(i) An offer of financial assistance

(OFA) for continued rail service under

49 U.S.C. 10904 (due 120 days after the

application is filed or 10 days after the

application is granted by the Board,

whichever occurs sooner);

(ii) Recommended provisions for

protection of the interests of employees;

(iii) A request for a public use

condition under 49 U.S.C. 10905; and

(iv) A statement pertaining to

prospective use of the right-of way for

interim trail use and rail banking under

16 U.S.C. 1247(d) and 49 CFR 1152.29.

All filings in response to this notice

must refer to STB Docket No. AB–545

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) Christopher E. V. Quinn,

Oppenheimer Wolff & Donnelly

(Illinois), Two Prudential Plaza, 45th

Floor, 180 North Stetson Avenue,

Chicago, IL 60601–6710. The original

and 10 copies of all comments or

protests shall be filed with the Board

with a certificate of service. Except as

otherwise set forth in part 1152, every

document filed with the Board must be

served on all parties to the

abandonment and discontinuance

proceeding. 49 CFR 1104.12(a).

The lines sought to be abandoned and

discontinued will be available for

subsidy or sale for continued rail use if

the Board decides to permit the

abandonment and discontinuance in

accordance with applicable laws and

regulations (49 U.S.C. 10904 and 49 CFR

1152.27). Each OFA must be

accompanied by a $1,000 filing fee. See

49 CFR 1002.2(f)(25). No subsidy

arrangement approved under 49 U.S.C.

10904 shall remain in effect for more

than 1 year unless otherwise mutually

agreed by the parties (49 U.S.C.

10904(f)(4)(B)). Applicant will promptly

provide upon request to each interested

party an estimate of the subsidy and

minimum purchase price required to

keep the line in operation. The carrier’s

representative to whom inquiries may

be made concerning sale or subsidy

terms is set forth above.

Persons seeking further information

concerning the 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

issues may be directed to the Board’s

Section of Environmental Analysis

(SEA) at (202) 565–1545. [TDD for the

hearing impaired is available at (202)

565–1695.]

An environmental assessment (EA) (or

environmental impact statement (EIS), if

necessary), prepared by SEA will be

served upon all parties of record and

upon any agencies or other persons who

commented during its preparation.

Other interested persons may contact

SEA to obtain a copy of the EA (or EIS).

EAs in abandonment proceedings

normally will be made available within

33 days of the filing of the application.

The deadline for submission of

comments on the EA will generally be

within 30 days of its service. The

comments received will be addressed in

the Board’s decision. A supplemental

EA or EIS may be issued where

appropriate.

Board decisions and notices are

available on our website at

‘‘WWW.STB.DOT.GOV.’’

Decided: June 30, 1998.

By the Board, David M. Konschnik,

Director, Office of Proceedings.

Vernon A. Williams,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 98–17942 Filed 7–7–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4915–00–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service

Proposed Collection; Comment

Request For Form 12040

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,

Public Law 104–13 (44 U.S.C.

3506(c)(2)(A)). Currently, the IRS is

soliciting comments concerning Form

12040, Order Blank for Charities

Conducting Fund Raising Events.

DATES: Written comments should be

received on or before September 8,

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 form should be directed to

Carol Savage, (202) 622–3945, Internal

Revenue Service, room 5569, 1111

Constitution Avenue NW., Washington,

DC 20224.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Title: Order Blank for Charities

Conducting Fund Raising Events.

OMB Number: 1545–1609.

Form Number: Form 12040.

Abstract: Form 12040 is used by

charitable organizations to order forms