Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 98 / Monday, May 20, 1996 / Notices 25269

vehicle eligibility number assigned to

vehicles admissible under this decision.

Final Determination

Accordingly, on the basis of the

foregoing, NHTSA hereby decides that

1992 Volvo 740 GL and 940 GL Sedan

and Wagon passenger cars not originally

manufactured to comply with all

applicable Federal motor vehicle safety

standards are substantially similar to

1992 Volvo 740 GL and 940 GL Sedan

and Wagon passenger cars originally

manufactured for importation into and

sale in the United States and certified

under 49 U.S.C. § 30115, and are

capable of being readily altered to

conform to all applicable Federal motor

vehicle safety standards.

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: May 14, 1996.

Marilynne Jacobs,

Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.

[FR Doc. 96–12635 Filed 5–17–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–59–M

[Docket No. 96–048; Notice 1]

Notice of Receipt of Petition for

Decision That Nonconforming 1984

Mitsubishi Pajero Passenger Cars Are

Eligible for Importation

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of receipt of petition for

decision that nonconforming 1984

Mitsubishi Pajero 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 1984 Mitsubishi

Pajero 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 June 19, 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.

Champagne Imports, Inc. of Lansdale,

Pennsylvania (Registered Importer No.

R–90–009) has petitioned NHTSA to

decide whether 1984 Mitsubishi Pajero

passenger cars are eligible for

importation into the United States. The

vehicle which Champagne believes is

substantially similar is the 1984

Mitsubishi Montero. Champagne has

submitted information indicating that

the manufacturer of the 1984 Mitsubishi

Montero certified that vehicle as

conforming to all applicable Federal

motor vehicle safety standards and

offered it for sale in the United States.

The petitioner contends that it

carefully compared the 1984 Mitsubishi

Pajero to the 1984 Mitsubishi Montero,

and found the two models to be

substantially similar with respect to

compliance with most applicable

Federal motor vehicle safety standards.

Champagne submitted information

with its petition intended to

demonstrate that the 1984 Mitsubishi

Pajero, as originally manufactured,

conforms to many Federal motor vehicle

safety standards in the same manner as

the 1984 Mitsubishi Montero that was

offered for sale in the United States, or

is capable of being readily altered to

conform to those standards.

Specifically, the petitioner claims that

the 1984 Mitsubishi Pajero is identical

to the certified 1984 Mitsubishi Montero

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, 113 Hood Latch

Systems, 116 Brake Fluid, 119 New

Pneumatic Tires for Vehicles other than

Passenger Cars, 124 Accelerator

Control Systems, 201 Occupant

Protection in Interior Impact, 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, 219 Windshield

Zone Intrusion, and 302 Flammability

of Interior Materials.

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 a

noncomplying symbol on the brake

failure indicator lamp; (b) installation of

a seat belt warning lamp that displays

the appropriate symbol; (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 DOT markings; (b)

installation of front and rear

sidemarker/reflector assemblies; (c)

installation of U.S.-model taillamp

assemblies.

Standard No. 111 Rearview Mirrors:

Replacement of the convex passenger

side rear view mirror.

Standard No. 114 Theft Protection:

Installation of a buzzer microswitch in

the steering lock assembly, and a

warning buzzer.

Standard No. 115 Vehicle

Identification Number: Installation of a

VIN plate that can be read from outside

the left windshield pillar, and a VIN
25270 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 98 / Monday, May 20, 1996 / Notices

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. 120 Tire Selection and

Rims for Motor Vehicles other than

Passenger Cars: Installation of a tire

information placard.

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. The petitioner states that the

vehicle is equipped at 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 with a combination lap and

shoulder restraint that releases by

means of a single push button at each

rear outboard seating position, and with

a lap belt at the rear center seating

position.

Standard No. 301 Fuel System

Integrity: Installation of a rollover valve

in the fuel tank vent line.

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 of 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 : May 14, 1996.

Marilynne Jacobs,

Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.

[FR Doc. 96–12636 Filed 5–17–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–59–M

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

[General Counsel Designation No. 220]

Appointment of Members to the Legal

Division Performance Review Board

Under the authority granted to me as

General Counsel of the Department of

the Treasury by 31 U.S.C. 301 and 26

U.S.C. 7801, Treasury Department Order

No. 101–5 (Revised), and pursuant to

the Civil Service Reform Act, I hereby

appoint the following persons to the

Legal Division Performance Review

Board:

(1) For the General Counsel Panel—

Neal S. Wolin, Deputy General

Counsel, who shall serve as

Chairperson;

Russell L. Munk, Assistant General

Counsel (International Affairs);

John E. Bowman, Assistant General

Counsel (Banking and Finance);

Robert M. McNamara, Jr., Assistant

General Counsel (Enforcement);

Kenneth R. Schmalzabach, Assistant

General Counsel (General Law and

Ethics); and

Elizabeth B. Anderson, Chief Counsel,

United States Customs Service.

(2) For the Internal Revenue Service

Panel—

Chairperson, Deputy Chief Counsel,

IRS;

Deputy General Counsel;

Two Associate Chief Counsel, IRS;

and

Two Regional Counsel, IRS.

I hereby delegate to the Chief Counsel

of the Internal Revenue Service the

authority to make the appointments to

the IRS Panel specified in this

Designation and to make the publication

of the IRS Panel as required by 5 U.S.C.

4314(c)(4).

Dated: May 13, 1996.

Edward S. Knight,

General Counsel.

[FR Doc. 96–12541 Filed 5–17–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4810–25–M