8768 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 15, 1995 / Notices

inch rim. We have also solicited the input of

two major tire manufacturers and specifically

inquired as to potential negative effects of

such usage. Our analysis, as well as that of

the tire manufacturers, is that there is no

safety-related issue. Load carrying capacities,

air retention, handling characteristics, and

other aspects of performance will not be

affected to any degree significant to motor

vehicle safety. The only potential effect of

such usage results from the fact that the tires

in question are slightly more spread on the

wider 9.00 inch rim resulting in some chance

of reduction in tread wear to a minor degree.

It should also be pointed out that the

22.5x9.00 inch size is generally a special

application tire and wheel combination

typically used in North America only on

fleets requiring a particular larger tire for the

needs of their operation. The wheel in

question is heavier and more expensive than

a standard 8.25 inch wheel, and these fleets

use the product because of specific higher

load requirements and would also use the

larger tire to meet those same requirements.

It is, therefore, Accuride’s conclusion that the

possibility that narrower tires would be used

on these wheels is extremely remote.

A comment on the petition was

received from Robert J. Crail of

Knoxville, TN, who concurred with

Accuride’s argument that the possibility

of a tire being misapplied on the

noncompliant rims is remote. He

recommended granting the petition.

Because Accuride had not specified

the names of the tire manufacturers that

it had consulted, NHTSA contacted the

applicant and learned that the

manufacturers were Michelin Tire

Corporation and Bridgestone/Firestone,

Inc. NHTSA spoke with representatives

of the two companies, each of whom

stated that the only possible effect of

misapplication would be a possible

minor increase in tire wear. At NHTSA’s

request, Accuride is sending an

explanatory letter to the entities to

whom Accuride sold the noncompliant

rims. NHTSA agrees with the argument

and comment that the possibility of

misapplication is remote due to

specialized use by truck fleets.

In consideration of the foregoing,

Accuride has met its burden of

persuasion that the noncompliance

described above is inconsequential to

motor vehicle safety, and it is hereby

exempted from providing the

notification required by 49 U.S.C.

30118, and the remedy required by 49

U.S.C. 30120.

Authority: (49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120;

delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.50 and

49 CFR 501.8)

Issued on: February 9, 1995.

Barry Felrice,

Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.

[FR Doc. 95–3693 Filed 2–14–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P

[Docket No. 94–103; Notice 2]

American Transportation Corporation;

Grant of Application for Decision of

Inconsequential Noncompliance

American Transportation Corporation

(AmTran) of Conway, Arkansas

determined that some of its vehicles

failed to comply with 49 CFR 571.120,

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard

(FMVSS) No. 120, ‘‘Tire Selection and

Rims for Vehicles Other Than Passenger

Cars,’’ and filed an appropriate report

pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, ‘‘Defect

and Noncompliance Reports.’’ AmTran

also applied to be exempted from the

notification and remedy requirements of

49 U.S.C. Chapter 301—‘‘Motor Vehicle

Safety’’ on the basis that the

noncompliance is inconsequential to

motor vehicle safety.

Notice of receipt of the application

was published on November 22, 1994,

and an opportunity afforded for

comment (59 FR 60190).

Paragraph S5.3 of FMVSS No. 120

requires that each vehicle to which it

applies must have a label affixed which

includes the size designation of the tires

and the size designation of the rims.

AmTran produced approximately

38,000 buses and school buses from

1987 through 1994 which do not meet

the labeling requirements stated in the

standard in that they lack the rim

diameter designation on the label.

However, the label does bear the

complete tire size, which includes the

tire diameter.

AmTran supported its application for

inconsequential noncompliance with

the following:

The rim width is listed on the certification

label; however, the rim diameter is not listed.

The complete tire size, including the

diameter (which is identical to the rim

diameter), is listed on each label. Therefore,

[AmTran] believes that sufficient information

is available for the user to match tire and rim

sizes appropriately.

No comments were received in

response to the notice.

Lack of rim size designation could

result in installation of replacement

tires of an improper size, or installation

of a replacement rim that is not

congruent with the other (unmarked)

rims. Presumably, a tire too small for the

rim would not fit and a tire too large for

the rim would be noticeable. Further, in

determining an appropriate replacement

rim, the individual servicing the vehicle

would most likely look at the size of the

tire on the rim being replaced. NHTSA

deems it unlikely that such an

individual would simply guess at the

correct rim diameter without

confirmation from a reliable source. The

vehicles whose labels lack the rim size

designation are buses and school buses,

are typically serviced by experienced

individuals, and, as a practical matter,

the noncompliance is unlikely to have

adverse safety consequences.

In consideration of the foregoing, the

applicant has met its burden of

persuasion, and the Administrator has

decided that the noncompliance herein

described is inconsequential to safety.

Accordingly, American Transportation

Corporation is hereby exempted from

providing notification according to 49

U.S.C. 30118, and remedy according to

49 U.S.C. 30120.

(49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120; delegation of

authority at 49 CFR 501.8)

Issued on: February 9, 1995.

Barry Felrice,

Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.

[FR Doc. 95–3694 Filed 2–14–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Fiscal Service

Surety Company Application and

Renewal Fees; Increase in Fees

Imposed

The Department of the Treasury,

Financial Management Service, will be

increasing the fees imposed and

collected as referred to in 31 CFR

223.22. This increase is to cover the

costs incurred by the Government for

services performed relative to qualifying

corporate sureties to write Federal

business.

The new fees are effective December

31, 1994, and are determined in

accordance with the Office of

Management and Budget Circular A–25,

as amended. The increase in fees is the

result of a thorough analysis of costs

associated with the Surety Bond Branch.

The new rate schedule is as follows:

(1) Examination of a company’s

application for a Certificate of Authority

as an acceptable surety or as an

acceptable reinsuring company on

Federal bonds—$3,725.

(2) Determination of a company’s

continued qualification for annual

renewal of its Certificate of Authority—

$2,200.

(3) Examination of a company’s

application for recognition as an

Admitted Reinsurer (except on excess

risks running to the United States)—

$1,325.

(4) Determination of a company’s

continued qualification for annual

renewal of its authority as an Admitted

Reinsurer—$930.