63568 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 237 / Monday, December 11, 1995 / Notices

NHTSA notes that if Jaguar wishes in

the future to modify the device on

which this exemption is based, the

company may have to submit a petition

to modify the exemption. Part 543.7(d)

states that a Part 543 exemption applies

only to vehicles that belong to a line

exempted under this part and equipped

with the antitheft device on which the

line’s exemption is based. Further, Part

543.9(c)(2) provides for the submission

of petitions ‘‘to modify an exemption to

permit the use of an antitheft device

similar to but differing from the one

specified in that exemption.’’ The

agency wishes to minimize the

administrative burden with Part

543.9(c)(2) could place on exempted

vehicle manufacturers and itself.

The agency did not intend in drafting

Part 543 to require the submission of a

modification petition for every change

to the components or design of an

antitheft device. The significance of

many such changes could be de

minimis. Therefore, NHTSA suggests

that if the manufacturer contemplates

making any changes the effects of which

might be characterized as de minimis, it

should consult the agency before

preparing and submitting a petition to

modify.

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 33106; delegation of

authority at 49 CFR 1.50.

Issued on: December 6, 1995.

Barry Felrice,

Associate Administrator for Safety

Performance Standards.

[FR Doc. 95–30101 Filed 12–8–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P

[Docket No. 95–94; Notice 1]

Notice of Receipt of Petition for

Decision That Nonconforming 1991

BMW 735IL Passenger Cars Are

Eligible for Importation

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of receipt of petition for

decision that nonconforming 1991 BMW

735IL passenger cares 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 1991 BMW 735IL

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 importation into and

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 January 10, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to

the docket number and notice number,

and be submitted to: Docket Section,

Room 5109. National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration, 400 Seventh St.,

SW., Washington, DC 20590. (Docket

hours are from 9:30 am to 4 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)

(formerly section 108(c)(3)(A)(i)(I) of the

National Traffic and Motor Vehicle

Safety Act (the Act)), 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 had decided that the motor

vehicle is substantially similar to a

motor vehicle originally manufactured

for importation into and for sale in the

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

30115 (formerly section 114 of the Act),

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.

Champagne Imports, Inc. of Lansdale,

Pennsylvania (‘‘Champagne’’)

(Registered Importer 90–009) has

petitioned NHTSA to decide whether

1991 BMW 735IL passenger cars are

eligible for importation into the United

States. The vehicle which Champagne

believes is substantially similar is the

1991 BMW 735IL that was

manufactured for importation into, and

sale in, the United States and certified

by its manufacturer, Bayerische Motoren

Werke A.G., as conforming to all

applicable Federal motor vehicle safety

standards.

The petitioner claims that it carefully

compared the non-U.S. certified 1991

BMW 735IL 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.

Champagne submitted information

with its petition intended to

demonstrate that the non-U.S. certified

1991 BMW 735IL, 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 1991 BMW 735IL

is identical to its U.S. certified

counterpart with respect to compliance

with Standards Nos. 102 Transmission

Shift Lever Sequence * * *., 103

Defrosting and Defogging Systems, 104

Windshield Wiping and Washing

Systems, 105 Hydraulic Brake Systems,

106 Brake Hoses, 107 Reflecting

Surfaces, 109 New Pneumatic Tires, 113

Hood Latch Systems, 116 Brake Fluid,

124 Acclerator 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, 211 Wheel Nuts, Wheel

Discs and Hubcaps, 212 Windshield

Retention, 216 Roof Crush Resistance,

219 Windshield Zone Intrusion, and 302

Flammability of Interior Materials.

Additionally, the petitioner states that

the non-U.S. certified 1991 BMW 735IL

complies with the Bumper Standard

found in 49 CFR part 581.

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: (a) Substitution of a lens

marked ‘‘Brake’’ for a lens with an ECE

symbol on the brake failure indicator

lamp; (b) installation of a seat belt

warning lamp; (c) recalibration of the

speedometer/odometer from kilometers

to miles per hour.

Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective

Devices and Associated Equipment: (a)

Installation of U.S.-model headlamp

assemblies which incorporate sealed

beam headlamps; (b) installation of

U.S.-model front and rear sidemarker/

reflector assemblies; (c) installation of

U.S.-model taillamp assemblies; (d)
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 237 / Monday, December 11, 1995 / Notices 63569

installation of a high mounted stop

lamp.

Standard No. 110 Tire Selection and

Rims: Installation of a tire information

placard.

Standard No. 111 Rearview Mirror:

Replacement of the passenger side

convex rearview mirror with a U.S.-

model component.

Standard No. 114 Theft Protection:

Installation of a warning buzzer

microswitch and a warning buzzer in

the steering lock assembly.

Standard No. 115 Vehicle

Identification Number: Installation of a

VIN plate that can be read from outside

the left windshield pillar, and a VIN

reference label on the edge of the door

or latch post nearest the driver.

Standard No. 118 Power Window

Systems: Rewiring of the power window

system so that the window transport is

inoperative when the ignition is

switched off.

Standard No. 208 Occupant Crash

Protection: (a) Installation of a U.S.-

model seat belt in the driver’s position,

or a belt webbing actuated microswitch

inside the driver’s seat belt retractor; (b)

installation of an ignition switchactuated seat belt warning lamp and

buzzer; (c) replacement of the driver’s

side air bag with a U.S.-model

component; (d) installation of a U.S.-

model knee bolster on the driver’s side

to augment the automatic restraint

system. The petitioner states that the

vehicle is equipped in each front

designated seating position with a

combination lap and shoulder restraint

that adjusts by means of an automatic

retractor and releases by means of a

single push button. The petitioner

further states that the vehicle is

equipped in each outboard rear

designated seating position with a

combination lap and shoulder restraint

that releases by means of a single push

button, and with a lap belt in its rear

center seating position.

Standard No. 214 Side Impact

Protection: Installation of reinforcing

beams.

Standard No. 301 Fuel System

Integrity: Installation of a rollover valve

in the fuel tank vent line between the

fuel tank and the evaporative emissions

collection canister.

Interested persons are invited to

submit comments on the petition

described above. Comments should refer

to the docket number and be submitted

to: Docket Section, National Highway

Traffic Safety Administration, Room

5109, 400 Seventh Street, SW.,

Washington, DC 20590. It is requested

but not required that 10 copies be

submitted.

All comments received before the

close of business on the closing date

indicated above will be considered, and

will be available for examination in the

docket at the above address both before

and after that date. To the extent

possible, comments filed after the

closing date will also be considered.

Notice of final action on the petition

will be published in the Federal

Register pursuant to the authority

indicated below.

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30141 (a)(1)(A) and

(b)(1); 49 CFR 593.8; delegations of authority

at 49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8.

Issued on: December 5, 1995.

Marilynne Jacobs,

Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.

[FR Doc. 95–30033 Filed 12–8–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–59–M

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS

AFFAIRS

Proposed Information Collection

Activity; Public Comment Request:

Application for Accreditation as

Service Organization Representative,

VA Form 21; and Appointment of

Attorney or Agent as Claimant’s

Representative, VA Form 22a

AGENCY: Office of General Counsel,

Department of Veterans Affairs.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: As part of its continuing effort

to reduce paperwork and respondent

burden, the Office of General Counsel

(OGC) invites the general public and

other Federal agencies to comment on

this information collection. This request

for comment is being made pursuant to

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

(Pub. L. 104–13; 44 U.S.C.

3506(c)(2)(A)). Comments should

address the accuracy of the burden

estimates and ways to minimize the

burden including the use of automated

collection techniques or the use of other

forms of information technology, as well

as other relevant aspects of the

information collection.

DATES: Written comments and

recommendations on the proposal for

the collection of information should be

received by no later than February 9,

1996.

ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments

to Harold (Butch) Miller, Office of

General Counsel (026A), Department of

Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue,

NW, Washington, DC 20420. All

comments will become a matter of

public record and will be summarized

in the OGC request for Office of

Management and Budget (OMB)

approval. In this document OGC is

soliciting comments concerning the

following information collection:

OMB Control Number: 2900–0018.

Title and Form Number: Application

for Accreditation as Service

Organization Representative, VA Form

21; and Appointment of Attorney or

Agent as Claimant’s Representative, VA

Form 22a.

Type of Review: Reinstatement,

without change, of a previously

approved collection for which approval

has expired.

Need and Uses: The forms are used to

appoint a service organization, attorney

or agent as a representative in claims for

VA benefits.

Current Circumstances: VA Form 21

will be evaluated by Office of General

Counsel to determine qualification for

accreditation and the need for

cautionary instructions concerning

conflict of interest. Applicants meeting

the regulatory standards are issued an

ID card allowing them access to VA files

of claimants who have designated the

service organization with which they

are affiliated as claims representative

and are issued a letter setting forth their

responsibilities. Those denied

accreditation, and their organizations,

are informed of the reason for the

denial. If the information were not

collected, VA would have no way of

evaluating applicants for accreditation

under the requirements of 38 CFR

14.629.

VA Form 22a will be reviewed by

VA’s Veterans Benefits Administration.

The information on the form will be

used to ascertain the identity of the

representative appointed by the

claimant to represent him or her and the

scope of the representative’s authority to

inspect records. This information is

necessary for determining whether

access to claimant records may be

provided and for notification purposes.

If the information were not collected,

VA could not recognize the

representative as the attorney or agent of

the claimant under applicable statutes

and regulations and could not provide

access to claimant records.

Affected Public: Individuals and

households, Not-for-profit institutions

and State, Local or Tribal Government.

Estimated Annual Burden: 1,650

hours.

Estimated Average Burden Per

Respondent: 15 minutes.

Frequency of Response: On occasion.

Estimated Number of Respondents:

6,600.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Requests for additional information or

copies of the form should be directed to