66340 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 245 / Thursday, December 21, 1995 / Notices

Krail, in the SP Western Region, at the

following dead end street locations:

Roseville Division

Brooklyn Subdivision, Valley Line,

County Road Milepost C–737.8

Valley Subdivision, East Valley Line,

Road Milepost C–183.0

Roseville Subdivision, No.1 Track,

Forest Street Milepost A–124.7

Martinez Subdivision, Sacramento Line,

Road Milepost A–9.4

Coast Subdivision, Coast Line, Road

Milepost E–79.7

San Joaquin Subdivision, Fresno Line,

Road Milepost B–109.5

San Joaquin Subdivision, Fresno Line,

Road Milepost B–204.6

San Joaquin Subdivision, Sacramento

Line, Road Milepost A–99.9

Los Angeles Division

Salinas Subdivision, Coast Line, Harris

Road Milepost E–121.8

Santa Barbara Subdivision, Coast Line,

Road Milepost E–403.2

Santa Barbara Subdivision, Coast Line,

Road Milepost E–422.6

West Colton Division

Mojave Subdivision, Bakersfield Line,

Road Milepost B–384.6

Mojave Subdivision, Bakersfield Line,

Road Milepost B–400.0

Mojave Subdivision, Bakersfield Line,

Road Milepost B–402.0

Yuma Subdivision, East Line, Road

Milepost B–574.3

Gila Subdivision, Phoenix Line, Road

Milepost R–922.8

El Paso Division

Carrizozo Subdivision, Tucumcari Line,

Road Milepost B–1298.2

Carrizozo Subdivision, Tucumcari Line,

Road Milepost B–1300.2

Carrizozo Subdivision, Tucumcari Line,

Road Milepost B–1300.4

The reason given for the proposed

changes is that due to the crossings

being closed for a number of years, the

barricade detectors are no longer

required, and will eliminate

unnecessary train delays associated

with vandalism.

BS–AP–No. 3377

Applicant: National Railroad Passenger

Corporation, Ms. Alison ConwaySmith, Vice President/Chief Engineer,

30th and Market Streets, Philadelphia,

Pennsylvania 19104

The National Railroad Passenger

Corporation (Amtrak) and the

Massachusetts Bay Transportation

Authority (MBTA) jointly seek approval

of the proposed modification of the

traffic control system, between Hill

Interlocking, milepost 219.1 and South

Bay Interlocking, milepost 227.0 near

Boston, Massachusetts, Dorchester

Branch, New England Division;

associated with the installation of a new

‘‘Park Interlocking’’ near milepost 224.0,

the discontinuance and removal of the

intermediate wayside signals on the No.

1 and No. 2 main tracks between South

Bay and Dana Interlocking in favor of

operating by cab signals alone, and the

installation of NORAC Rule 280(a)

signals at South Bay, Park, and Dana

interlockings.

The reason given for the proposed

changes is that the existing wayside

signals are at the end of their useful life

span and will require replacement

within the next four years. The

Dorchester Branch is an extremely high

crime and vandalism area, and the

elimination of the wayside signals

would increase the realiablity of the

signal system, increase the safety of

maintenance personnel, and maintain

the safety of railroad traffic.

BS–AP–No. 3378

Applicant: Burlington Northern Santa

Fe Railroad Company, Mr. William G.

Peterson, Director Signal Engineering,

1900 Continental Plaza, 777 Main

Street, Fort Worth, Texas 76102–5304

The Burlington Northern Santa Fe

Railroad Company seeks approval of the

proposed discontinuance and removal

of the traffic control system, on the

single main track, between Appleton,

Minnesota, milepost 578.93 and

Summit, South Dakota, milepost 633.2,

Willmar Division, 12th Subdivision, a

distance of approximately 54.3 miles;

including conversion of Big Stone

Control Point, milepost 602.2 to

automatic switches, conversion of the

remaining power-operated switches to

hand operation, removal of all

associated signals, and operate train

movements by Track Warrant Control.

The proposed changes also include the

installation of an operative approach

signal near milepost 579.5 and

installation of a proximity warning

system on all locomotives between

Appleton, Minnesota and Terry,

Montana.

The reasons given for the proposed

changes are that reduced traffic patterns

do not justify high cost to maintain an

aging signal system; a late October snow

storm broke miles of pole line, cross

arms, and poles which to replace in

kind is estimated at $110,000; large

amounts of capital dollars will be

required to replace pole line with

electronic coded track circuits in the

near future; and full radio coverage is

reported.

BS–AP–No. 3379

Applicant: Burlington Northern Santa

Fe Railroad Company, Mr. William G.

Peterson, Director Signal Engineering,

1900 Continental Plaza, Fort Worth,

Texas 76102–5304

The Burlington Northern Santa Fe

Railroad Company seeks approval of the

proposed discontinuance and removal

of the traffic control and automatic

block signal systems, on the single main

track, between Summit, South Dakota,

milepost 633.2 and Terry, Montana,

milepost 1078.9, Willmar and

Yellowstone Divisions, Appleton,

Mobridge, and Hettinger Subdivisions, a

distance of approximately 445.7 miles;

including conversion of West End of

Aberdeen Control Point, near milepost

709.1 to automatic switches, conversion

of the remaining power-operated

switches to hand operation, removal of

all associated signals, and operate train

movements by Track Warrant Control.

The proposed changes also include the

installation of a proximity warning

system on all locomotives between

Appleton, Minnesota and Terry,

Montana.

The reasons given for the proposed

changes are that reduced traffic patterns

do not justify high cost to maintain an

aging signal system; large amounts of

capital dollars will be required to

replace pole line with electronic coded

track circuits in the near future; and full

radio coverage will be provided.

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. The original and two copies

of the protest shall be filed with the

Associate Administrator for Safety,

FRA, 400 Seventh Street, SW.,

Washington, D.C. 20590 within 45

calendar days of the date of issuance of

this notice. Additionally, one copy of

the protest shall be furnished to the

applicant at the address listed above.

FRA expects to be able to determine

these matters without 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 December

18, 1995.

Phil Olekszyk,

Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety

Compliance and Program Implementation.

[FR Doc. 95–31114 Filed 12–20–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–06-P
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 245 / Thursday, December 21, 1995 / Notices 66341

Maritime Administration

Notice of Approval of Applicant as

Trustee

Notice is hereby given that First Trust

of Illinois, National Association, with

offices at 400 North Michigan Avenue,

Chicago, Illinois, 60611, has been

approved as Trustee pursuant to Public

Law 100–710 and 46 CFR part 221.

Dated: December 18, 1995.

By Order of the Maritime Administrator.

Joel C. Richard,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–31105 Filed 12–20–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–81–P

Notice of Change of Name of Approved

Trustee

Notice is hereby given that effective

April 22, 1994, Bank of Delaware, with

offices at 222 Delaware Avenue,

Wilmington, Delaware, 19899–0791, has

changed its name to PNC Bank,

Delaware.

Dated: December 18, 1995.

By Order of the Maritime Administrator.

Joel C. Richard,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–31104 Filed 12–20–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–81–P

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

Petition for Exemption From the

Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention

Standard; Volkswagen

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration (NHTSA)

Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.

SUMMARY: This notice grants in full the

petition of Volkswagen of America, Inc.,

(Volkswagen) for an exemption from the

parts-marking requirements of the

Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention

Standard for the Model Year (MY) 1997

Passat car line. This petition is granted

because the agency has determined that

the antitheft device to be placed on the

line as standard equipment is likely to

be as effective in reducing and deterring

motor theft as compliance with the

parts-marking requirements of the Theft

Prevention Standard.

DATES: The exemption granted by this

notice is effective beginning with the

1997 model year.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.

Barbara Gray, Office of Market

Incentives, NHTSA, 400 Seventh Street,

S.W., Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Gray’s

telephone number is (202) 366–1740.

Her fax number is (202) 493–2739.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On

September 1, 1995, Volkswagen of

America, Inc., (Volkswagen), submitted

a petition for exemption from the partsmarking requirements of the Theft

Prevention Standard (49 CFR Part 541)

for the Passat car line. The petition is

pursuant to 49 CFR Part 543, Exemption

from Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard,

based on the installation of an antitheft

device as standard equipment for the

entire line.

Volkswagen’s submittal is considered

a complete petition, as required by 49

CFR Part 543.7, in that it met the general

requirements contained in § 543.5 and

the specific content requirements of

§ 543.6. Volkswagen requested

confidential treatment for some of the

information and attachments submitted

in support of its petition, including the

date of production for the Passat car

line. In a letter to Volkswagen dated

October 2, 1995, the agency granted the

petitioner’s request for confidential

treatment.

In its petition, Volkswagen provided a

detailed description and diagram of the

identity, design, and location of the

components of the antitheft device for

the new line. This antitheft device

includes an engine starter-interrupt

feature and an alarm function. The

antitheft device is activated by removing

the ignition key and locking either of

the front doors with it. The alarm

monitors the doors, hood, trunk and

radio.

In order to ensure reliability and

durability of the device, Volkswagen

stated that it conducted tests based on

its own specified standards. Volkswagen

provided the test reports for its

proposed antitheft device, which is

essentially the same as that currently

installed on the MY 1994 Volkswagen

Corrado, showing that the reliability and

durability of the device complied with

specified performance requirements for

each test. Volkswagen stated that the

device complied with its standards for

durability, electrical and electronic

operating requirements, thermal and

mechanical shock resistance and

electromagnetic compatibility.

Volkswagen compared the device

proposed for the Passat car line with

devices which NHTSA has determined

to be as effective in reducing and

deterring motor vehicle theft as would

compliance with the parts-marking

requirements. Volkswagen stated that

antitheft devices such as that proposed

for its line and those already granted

exemptions from the parts-marking

requirements have been found effective

in reducing motor vehicle theft.

Specifically, Volkswagen based its belief

on reduced theft rates for comparable

lines such as the Mitsubishi Diamante,

the Toyota Cressida, the Nissan

Maxima, the Toyota Supra, the Nissan

300ZX, the Mazda RX–7, and the Audi

5000. Additionally, Volkswagen stated

that the Passat car line experienced theft

rates below the median theft rate

(3.5826) for MYs 1990/1991 and 1992.

Volkswagen believes that the low-theft

ratings for those years may be

attributable to the installation of an

antitheft device as standard equipment

on the line beginning with the 1991

model year. Volkswagen stated that it

believes the theft rating for the MY 1997

Passat car line with the installation of

the antitheft device described in its

petition will also be below the 3.5826

median theft rate.

Based on evidence submitted by

Volkswagen, the agency believes that

the antitheft device for the MY 1997

Volkswagen Passat line is likely to be as

effective in reducing and deterring

motor vehicle theft as compliance with

the parts-marking requirements of the

Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR Part

541).

The agency believes that the device

will provide the types of performance

listed in 49 CFR Part 543.6(a)(3):

promoting activation; attracting

attention to unauthorized entries;

preventing defeat or circumvention of

the device by unauthorized persons;

preventing operation of the vehicle by

unauthorized entrants; and ensuring the

reliability and durability of the device.

As required by 49 U.S.C. 33106 and

49 CFR Part 543.6(a)(4) and (5), the

agency finds that Volkswagen has

provided adequate reasons for its belief

that the antitheft device will reduce and

deter theft. This conclusion is based on

the information Volkswagen provided

about its device. This confidential

information included a description of

reliability and functional tests

conducted by Volkswagen for the

antitheft device and its components.

For the foregoing reasons, the agency

hereby grants in full Volkswagen’s

petition for exemption for the MY 1997

Passat car line from the parts-marking

requirements of 49 CFR Part 541.

If Volkswagen decides not to use the

exemption for this line, it must formally

notify the agency, and, thereafter, the

line must be fully marked as required by

49 CFR Parts 541.5 and 541.6 (marking

of major component parts and

replacement parts).

NHTSA notes that if Volkswagen

wishes in the future to modify the

device on which this exemption is

based, the company may have to submit