366 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 3 / Thursday, January 4, 1996 / Notices

existing CBC Fund providing for the

transfer of substantially all of the assets

of one such fund to the other in

exchange for the other’s shares, or (b) a

CBC Fund to be newly created

providing for the transfer of

substantially all of the assets of such

Chase Fund to the newly created CBC

Fund in exchange for shares of the

newly created CBC Fund (each such

transaction, a ‘‘Fund Merger’’).

6. Applicants believe that it will not

be possible to complete the Fund

Family Combination or any of the

expected Fund Mergers prior to the

Holding Company Merger. Accordingly,

applicants request an exemption from

section 15(a) of the Act to permit the

implementation, without shareholder

approval, of the Interim Agreements.

The exemption would cover the period

commencing on the date of the Holding

Company Merger and continuing

through the date the Interim Agreements

are approved or disapproved by

shareholders of the respective Chase

Funds, which period shall be no longer

than 120 days after January 31, 1996

(the ‘‘Interim Period’’). Applicants also

request that such relief extend to the

Bank Merger during the Interim Period.

Applicants’ Legal Analysis

1. Section 15(a) prohibits an

investment adviser from providing

investment advisory services to an

investment company except under a

written contract that has been approved

by a majority of the investment

company’s voting securities. The section

further requires that the written contract

provide for its automatic termination in

the event of an assignment. Section

2(a)(4) of the Act defines ‘‘assignment’’

to include any direct or indirect transfer

of a contract by the assignor or of a

controlling block of the assignor’s

outstanding voting securities by a

security holder of the assignor.

2. Section 2(a)(9) defines ‘‘control’’ as

the power to exercise a controlling

influence over the management or

policies of a company. Beneficial

ownership of more than 25% of a

company’s voting securities is presumed

to constitute control.

3. Upon consummation of the Holding

Company Merger, approximately 43% of

the voting securities of the surviving

corporation will be owned by the

current Chase shareholders and 57%

will be owned by the current CBC

shareholders. Thus, the Holding

Company Merger may be deemed to

result in an ‘‘assignment’’ of the Existing

Agreements. Therefore, these

agreements will terminate by their

terms. Similarly, the Bank Merger may

be deemed to result in an ‘‘assignment’’

of the Interim Agreements, thus

terminating these agreements.

4. Rule 15a–4 provides, among other

things, that if an advisory contract is

terminated by assignment, the

investment adviser may continue to act

as such for 120 days at the previous

compensation rate if a new contract is

approved by the board of directors of

the investment company, and if the

investment adviser or a controlling

person of the investment adviser does

not directly or indirectly receive money

or other benefit in connection with the

assignment. Because Chase and the

Adviser will receive a benefit in

connection with the assignment of the

contracts, applicants may not rely on

the rule.

5. Absent the requested relief,

applicants believe that it may be

necessary, in the case of most Chase

Funds, to undertake multiple proxy

solicitations within a relatively short

time frame. Applicants believe that

engaging in the solicitation of multiple

proxies from the shareholders of a single

investment company for approvals

arising out of the same series of events

would be confusing to shareholders,

burdensome, inefficient, costly, and not

in the best interests of the Chase Funds

or their shareholders.

6. Applicants believe that the

requested relief will allow for the

orderly completion of the Fund Mergers

and the Fund Family Combination, as

well as reasonable adjournments of

shareholder meetings if necessary to

obtain sufficient shareholder responses

to proxy solicitations to obtain the

various approvals as may be necessary

in connection with the Fund Mergers.

7. Section 6(c) of the Act provides that

the SEC may exempt any person,

security, or transaction from any

provision of the Act, if and to the extent

that such exemption is necessary or

appropriate in the public interest and

consistent with the protection of

investors and the purposes fairly

intended by the policy and provisions of

the Act. Applicants believe that the

requested relief from section 15(a) meets

this standard.

Applicants’ Conditions

Applicants agree as conditions to the

requested exemptive relief that:

1. Each Interim Agreement will have

the same terms and conditions as the

respective Existing Agreement, except

for the effective and termination dates.

2. Fees earned by the Adviser (or the

Successor, if applicable) and Atlanta

Capital and paid by a Chase Fund

during the Interim Period in accordance

with the Interim Agreement will be

maintained in an interest-bearing

escrow account, and amounts in such

account (including interest earned on

such paid fees) will be paid to the

Adviser (or the Successor, if applicable)

and in the case of IEEE Balanced Fund,

paid to Atlanta Capital only upon

approval of the related Chase Fund

shareholders or, in the absence of such

approval, to the related Chase Fund.

3. Each Chase Fund will hold

meetings of shareholders to vote on

approval of the related Interim

Agreement, on or before the 120th day

following January 31, 1996.

4. Chase, CBC and/or one or more

subsidiaries of the foregoing will pay

the costs of preparing and filing this

application. Chase, CBC and/or one or

more subsidiaries of the foregoing will

pay the costs relating to the solicitation

of the approvals of the Chase Fund

shareholders, to the extent such costs

relate to the shareholder approval of

Interim Agreements necessitated by the

Mergers.

5. The Adviser (or the Successor, if

applicable) and Atlanta Capital, as the

case may be, will take all appropriate

actions to ensure that the scope and

quality of advisory and other services

provided to the Chase Funds under the

Interim Agreements will be at least

equivalent, in the judgment of the

respective Boards, including a majority

of the Independent Trustees, to the

scope and quality of services previously

provided. In the event of any material

change in personnel providing services

under the Interim Agreements, the

Adviser (or the Successor, if applicable)

or Atlanta Capital, as the case may be,

will apprise and consult the Boards of

the affected Chase Funds to assure that

such Boards, including a majority of the

Independent Trustees, are satisfied that

the services provided by the Adviser (or

the Successor, if applicable) or Atlanta

Capital, as the case may be, will not be

diminished in scope or quality.

For the SEC, by the Division of Investment

Management, under delegated authority.

Jonathan G. Katz,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 96–129 Filed 1–3–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 3 / Thursday, January 4, 1996 / Notices 367

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

[Docket No. 95–99; Notice 1]

Notice of Receipt of Petition for

Decision That Nonconforming 1994

Alfa Romeo 164 Passenger Cars Are

Eligible for Importation

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of receipt of petition for

decision that nonconforming 1994 Alfa

Romeo 164 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 Alfa Romeo

164 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 February 5, 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 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.

Liphardt & Associates of

Ronkonkoma, New York (‘‘Liphardt’’)

(Registered Importer 90–004) has

petitioned NHTSA to decide whether

1994 Alfa Romeo 164 passenger cars are

eligible for importation into the United

States. The vehicle which Liphardt

believes is substantially similar is the

1994 Alfa Romeo 164 that was

manufactured for importation into, and

sale in, the United States and certified

by its manufacturer as conforming to all

applicable Federal motor vehicle safety

standards.

The petitioner claims that it carefully

compared the non-U.S. certified 1994

Alfa Romeo 164 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.

Liphardt submitted information with

its petition intended to demonstrate that

the non-U.S. certified 1994 Alfa Romeo

164, 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 Alfa Romeo

164 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, 111

Rearview Mirrors; 113 Hood Latch

Systems, 116 Brake Fluid, 118 Power

Window Systems; 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 Impact

Protection, 216 Roof Crush Resistance,

219 Windshield Zone Intrusion, 301

Fuel System Integrity, and 302

Flammability of Interior Materials.

Additionally, the petitioner states that

the non-U.S. certified 1994 Alfa Romeo

164 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 appropriate

symbols on the brake failure, parking

brake, and seat belt warning lamps; (b)

installation of a U.S.-model

speedometer.

Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective

Devices and Associated Equipment: (a)

installation of U.S.-model headlamp

assemblies which incorporate sealed

beam headlamps and front sidemarkers;

(b) installation of U.S.-model taillamps;

(c) installation of a high mounted stop

lamp.

Standard No. 110 Tire Selection and

Rims: installation of a tire information

placard.

Standard No. 114 Theft Protection:

installation of a warning buzzer in the

steering lock electrical circuit.

Standard No. 115 Vehicle

Identification Number: installation of a

VIN plate that can be read from outside

the left windshield pillar, and VIN

reference label on the edge of the door

or latch post nearest the driver.

Standard No. 208 Occupant Crash

Protection: installation of a seat belt

warning buzzer. The petitioner states

that the vehicle is equipped with an air

bag and knee bolster that have identical

part numbers to those found on its U.S.-

certified counterpart.

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.
368 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 3 / Thursday, January 4, 1996 / Notices

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 29, 1995.

Marilynne Jacobs,

Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.

[FR Doc. 96–106 Filed 1–3–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–59–M

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service

Agency Information Collection

Activities; Comment Request

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.

Currently, the IRS is soliciting

comments concerning new Form W–7,

Application for IRS Individual Taxpayer

Identification Number.

DATES: Written comments should be

received on or before March 4, 1996, to

be assured of consideration.

ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments

to Garrick R. Shear, Internal Revenue

Service, T:FP, room 5571, 1111

Constitution Avenue NW., Washington,

DC 20224.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Requests for additional information or

copies of the information collection

should be directed to Martha R. Brinson,

(202) 622–3869, Internal Revenue

Service, T:FP, room 5571, 1111

Constitution Avenue NW., Washington,

DC 20224.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Title: Application for IRS Individual

Taxpayer Identification Number

OMB Number: To be assigned later.

Form Number: W–7.

Abstract: Proposed regulations under

section 6109 of the Internal Revenue

Code introduce a new type of taxpayer

identifying number called the ‘‘IRS

individual taxpayer identification

number’’ (ITIN). When available,

individuals who currently do not have,

and are not eligible to obtain, social

security numbers can apply for this

number. Taxpayers may use this

number when required to furnish a

taxpayer identifying number under

regulations. An ITIN would be applied

for on Form W–7 and is intended for tax

use only.

Current Actions: This is a new

collection of information.

Type of Review: New OMB approval.

Affected Public: Individuals.

Estimated Number of Respondents:

500,000.

Estimated Time Per Respondent: 56

minutes.

Estimated Total Annual Burden

Hours: 470,000.

REQUEST FOR COMMENTS: Comments

submitted in response to this notice will

be summarized and/or included in the

request for OMB approval. All

comments will become a matter of

public record. Written comments should

address the accuracy of the burden

estimates and ways to minimize 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 request.

Garrick R. Shear,

IRS Reports Clearance Officer

[FR Doc. 96–63 Filed 1–3–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830–01–U