18188 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 24, 1996 / Notices

rates. VFLIC will maintain at its

principal offices, and make available to

the Commission and its staff, a

memorandum setting forth in detail the

products analyzed in the course of, and

the methodology and results of,

Applicants’ comparative review.

9.VFLIC represents that, before

issuing any Future Contracts, it will:

make the same determinations on the

same basis as to the mortality and

expense risk charge under such Future

Contracts; and maintain at its executive

office, and make available to the

Commission and its staff upon request,

a memorandum setting forth in detail

the methodology used in making such

determinations.

10. VFLIC has concluded that there is

a reasonable likelihood that the

proposed distribution financing

arrangements made with respect to the

Contracts will benefit the Separate

Account and the Other Accounts, and

their respective Contract owners. VFLIC

represents that it will maintain, and

make available to the Commission and

its staff upon request, a memorandum

setting forth the basis of such

conclusion.

11. VFLIC represents that, before

issuing any Future Contracts, it will

conclude that there is a reasonable

likelihood that the distribution

financing arrangements proposed for the

Future Contracts will benefit the

Separate Account, any Other Accounts

and their respective Future Contract

owners. VFLIC represents that it will

maintain, and make available to the

Commission and its staff upon request,

a memorandum setting forth the basis

for such a conclusion.

12. The Separate Account and Other

Accounts will be invested only in an

underlying fund (or portfolio) which

undertakes, in the event VFLIC should

adopt a plan for financing distribution

expenses pursuant to Rule 12b–1 under

the 1940 Act, to have such plan

formulated and approved by the fund’s

board of directors, the majority of whom

are not ‘‘interested persons’’ of the fund

(or portfolio) within the meaning of

Section 2(a)(19) of the 1940 Act.

Conclusion

For the reasons set forth above,

Applicants represent that the

exemptions requested are necessary and

appropriate in the public interest and

consistent with the protection of

investors and the purposes fairly

intended by the policy and provisions of

the 1940 Act.

For the Commission, by the Division of

Investment Management, pursuant to

delegated authority.

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 96–10055 Filed 4–23–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

[CGD 96–022]

Merchant Marine Personnel Advisory

Committee (MERPAC) Working Group

Meeting Concerning Implementation of

the 1995 Amendments to the

International Convention on Standards

of Training, Certification, and

Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978

(STCW)

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: MERPAC’s STCW working

group will meet to discuss various

issues relating to implementation of the

1995 Amendments to STCW. The

meeting is open to the public.

DATES: The MERPAC STCW working

group meeting will be held on

Thursday, May 16, 1996, from 9:30 a.m.

to 3 p.m..

ADDRESSES: The MERPAC STCW

working group meeting will be held at

the MEBA Engineering School, 27050

St. Michaels Road, Easton, MD 31601–

7550. The telephone number is (410)

822–9737.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Commander Jon Sarubbi, Executive

Director, or Mr. Mark Gould, Assistant

to the Executive Director, Commandant

(G–MOS–1), U.S. Coast Guard, 2100

Second Street, SW., Washington, DC

20593–0001; telephone (202) 267–0229,

fax (202) 267–4570.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of

this meeting is given pursuant to the

Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5

U.S.C., App. § 1 et seq. The agenda for

the MERPAC STCW working group

meeting will include discussion of the

following topics:

(1) Electronic technician (Global

Maritime Distress and Safety System

(GMDSS) and non-GMDSS)

requirement;

(2) Training record book requirement;

and,

(3) Rest hours requirement.

With advance notice, and at the

working group chairman’s discretion,

members of the public may make oral

presentations during the meeting.

Persons wishing to make oral

presentations should notify Mr. Gould,

listed above under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT, no less than five

days before the meeting. Written

material may be submitted any time for

presentation to the subcommittee.

However, to ensure advance distribution

to each subcommittee member, persons

submitting written material are asked to

provide 30 copies to Mr. Gould no later

than May 9, 1996.

Dated: April 16, 1996.

Joseph J. Angelo,

Director for Standards, Marine Safety and

Environmental Protection Directorate.

[FR Doc. 96–10084 Filed 4–23–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–14–M

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

[Docket No. 96–40; Notice 1]

Notice of Receipt of Petition for

Decision That Nonconforming 1994

Mercedes-Benz E500 Passenger Cars

Are Eligible for Importation

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of receipt of petition for

decision that nonconforming 1994

Mercedes-Benz E500 passenger cars 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 1994 MercedesBenz E500 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 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 May 24, 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).
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 24, 1996 / Notices 18189

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 has decided that the motor

vehicle is substantially similar to a

motor vehicle originally manufactured

for importation into and 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

1994 Mercedes-Benz E500 (Model ID

124.036) passenger cars are eligible for

importation into the United States. The

vehicle which Champagne believes is

substantially similar is the 1994

Mercedes-Benz E500 that was

manufactured for importation into, and

sale in, the United States and certified

by its manufacturer, Daimler Benz A.G.,

as conforming to all applicable Federal

motor vehicle safety standards.

The petitioner claims that it carefully

compared the non-U.S. certified 1994

Mercedes-Benz E500 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

1994 Mercedes-Benz E500, 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 1994 MercedesBenz E500 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 Accelerator Control Systems, 201

Occupant Protection in Interior Impact,

202 Head Restraints, 204 Steering

Control Rearward Displacement, 205

Glazing Materials, 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 1994 MercedesBenz E500 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) inscription of the word

‘‘Brake’’ on the brake failure indicator

lamp lens; (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

headlamps with a DOT marking; (b)

installation of U.S.- model front and rear

sidemarker/reflector assemblies; (c)

installation of U.S.- model taillamp

assemblies; (d) 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 convex passenger

side rearview mirror.

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. 206 Door Locks and

Door Retention Components:

replacement of the rear door locks and

locking buttons with U.S.- model

components.

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 switch

actuated seat belt warning lamp and

buzzer. The petitioner states that the

vehicle is equipped with an automatic

restraint system consisting of a driver’s

and passenger’s side air bag and knee

bolster, and that these will be replaced

with U.S.-model components, if

necessary. The petitioner further 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 also

states that the vehicle is equipped with

a combination lap and shoulder

restraint that releases by means of a

single push button in both rear outboard

designated seating positions, and with a

lap belt in the rear center designated

seating position.

Standard No. 214 Side Impact

Protection: installation of reinforcing

beams in the doors.

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, S.W.,

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.
18190 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 24, 1996 / Notices

Issued on: April 18, 1996.

Marilynne Jacobs,

Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.

[FR Doc. 96–10061 Filed 4–23–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P

[Docket No. 96–01; Notice 2]

Decision That Nonconforming 1991

Volkswagen GTI (Canadian) Passenger

Cars Are Eligible for Importation

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of decision by NHTSA

that nonconforming 1991 Volkswagen

GTI (Canadian) passenger cars are

eligible for importation.

SUMMARY: This notice announces the

decision by NHTSA that 1991

Volkswagen GTI (Canadian) passenger

cars not originally manufactured to

comply with all applicable Federal

motor vehicle safety standards are

eligible for importation into the United

States because they are substantially

similar to a vehicle originally

manufactured for importation into and

sale in the United States and certified by

its manufacturer as complying with the

safety standards (the 1991 Volkswagen

Golf GTI), and they are capable of being

readily altered to conform to the

standards.

DATES: This decision is effective as of

April 24, 1996.

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) 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 has decided that the motor

vehicle is substantially similar to a

motor vehicle originally manufactured

for importation into and 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 R–90–009)

petitioned NHTSA to decide whether

1991 Volkswagen GTI (Canadian)

passenger cars are eligible for

importation into the United States.

NHTSA published notice of the petition

on January 23, 1996 (61 FR 1816) to

afford an opportunity for public

comment. The notice identified the

vehicle that is the subject of the petition

as the ‘‘1991 Volkswagen Golf GT.’’ In

its comments responding to the notice,

a representative of Volkswagen, the

vehicle’s manufacturer, stated that the

vehicle identification number (VIN)

assigned to the specific vehicle that the

petitioner seeks to import identifies that

vehicle as a 1991 Volkswagen GTI

manufactured in Mexico for the

Canadian market. After being apprised

of this comment, the petitioner

acknowledged that the petition was in

error, and that the manufacturer’s

representative properly identified the

vehicle. In view of this correction, this

notice describes the petition as

pertaining to a 1991 Volkswagen GTI

(Canadian).

The notice of petition identified the

vehicle that Champagne claims to be

substantially similar to the subject

vehicle as the version of the 1991

Volkswagen Golf GT that was

manufactured for importation into and

sale in the United States and certified by

its manufacturer, Volkswagenwerke

A.G., as conforming to all applicable

Federal motor vehicle safety standards.

After reviewing the manufacturer’s

comments, Champagne informed

NHTSA that the comparison vehicle is

properly identified as the ‘‘1991

Volkswagen Golf GTI.’’ This notice will

use that designation in referring to the

comparison vehicle. As noted in the

notice of petition, the petitioner claimed

that it had carefully compared the two

vehicles, and found them to be

substantially similar with respect to

compliance with most applicable

Federal motor vehicle safety standards.

Specifically, the petitioner claimed

that the Volkswagen GTI (Canadian) is

identical to the 1991 Volkswagen Golf

GTL with respect to compliance with

Standard 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, 108

Lamps, Reflective Devices, and

Associated Equipment, 109 New

Pneumatic Tires, 110 Tire Selection and

Rims, 111 Rearview Mirrors, 113 Hood

Latch Systems, 114 Theft Protection,

115 Vehicle Identification Number, 116

Brake Fluid, 124 Accelerator Control

Systems, 201 Occupant Protection in

Interior Impact, 202 Head Restraints,

203 Impact Protection for the Driver

From the Steering Control System, 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, 214 Side Door

Strength, 216 Roof Crush Resistance,

219 Windshield Zone Intrusion, 301

Fuel System Integrity, and 302

Flammability of Interior Materials.

Additionally, the petitioner stated

that the 1991 Volkswagen GTI

(Canadian) complies with the Bumper

Standard found in 49 CFR Part 581.

Petitioner also contended that the

vehicle is capable of being readily

modified 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) replacement of the

speedometer/odometer assembly with a

U.S.-model component.

Standard No. 208 Occupant Crash

Protection: (a) installation of U.S.-model

lap belts in the driver’s and front

passenger’s seating positions; (b)

installation of U.S.- model automatic

shoulder restraints in the driver’s and

front passenger’s seating positions. The

petitioner stated that the rear outboard

designated seating positions are

equipped with combination lap and

shoulder restraints that release by

means of a single push button.

One comment was received in

response to the notice of petition, from

Volkswagen of America, Inc.

(‘‘Volkswagen’’), the United States

representative of Volkswagen AG, the

vehicle’s manufacturer. In addition to

these companies, the comment was

submitted on behalf of Volkswagen de

Mexico. In its comment, Volkswagen

stated that in order to conform the 1991

Volkswagen GTI (Canadian) to the

requirements of Standard No. 101, the

instrument cluster would have to be