2106 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No.
8 / Thursday, January 12, 2006 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2005–23419; Notice 1]
Optronics Products Company, Inc.,
Receipt of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
Optronics Products Company, Inc.
(Optronics) has determined that certain
combination lamps that it produced in
2002 do not comply with 49 CFR
571.108, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standard (FMVSS) No. 108, ‘‘Lamps,
reflective devices, and associated
equipment.’’ Optronics has filed an
appropriate report pursuant to 49 CFR
part 573, ‘‘Defect and Noncompliance
Reports.’’
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h), Optronics has petitioned for
an exemption from the notification and
remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C.
Chapter 301 on the basis that this
noncompliance is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety.
This notice of receipt of Optronics’
petition is published under 49 U.S.C.
30118 and 30120 and does not represent
any agency decision or other exercise of
judgment concerning the merits of the
petition.
Affected are a total of approximately
6000 4-inch round LED 3 function
combination lamps, part number
STL45RK, produced in November 2002
and sold as replacement equipment for
trailers less than 80 inches in overall
width. NHTSA testing of this model
showed that three out of the four tested
lamps failed to meet the minimum
photometry requirements for a 3-lighted
section lamp. In particular, the lamps
failed to meet the minimum zone 3
photometry requirements for the
taillamp, stop lamp, and turn signal
lamp. The FMVSS No. 108 minimum
photometry requirement for zone 3 of
these functions is 24 cd, 520 cd, and 520
cd, respectively. The lamps failed to
meet the zonal requirements by a
margin of 7% to 28% for the taillamp,
and 4% to 18% for the stop and turn
signal lamps.
Optronics believes that the
noncompliance is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety and that no
corrective action is warranted.
Optronics states that, although the
lamps noncomply with the
requirements for a 3-lighted section
erjones on PROD1PC68 with NOTICES
lamp, they would meet or exceed the
light output requirements if the lamps
were tested to the requirements of ‘‘an
incandescent light of the same fit, form,
and function.’’
VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:02 Jan 11, 2006 Jkt 208001
Optronics asserts that ‘‘[h]olding a 4-
inch LED light to a higher standard than
a 4-inch incandescent light is the result
of definitions in the regulations and is
not based on the relative safety of one
light versus another.’’ The petitioner
further states,
[W]e believe that the lights’ failure under
the regulations is a technical issue and not
a substantive one * * *. Consumers and
Company’s (sic) should not be required to go
through a product recall on a technicality.
What is important here is the safety of the
consumer. We believe that the data in this
filing show that the lights are as safe as any
incandescent on the road.
Optronics states that there have been
no accidents, injuries, fatalities, or
warranty claims related to this
noncompliance.
Interested persons are invited to
submit written data, views, and
arguments on this petition. Comments
must refer to the docket and notice
number cited at the beginning of this
notice and be submitted by any of the
following methods. Mail: Docket
Management Facility, U.S. Department
of Transportation, Nassif Building,
Room PL–401, 400 Seventh Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20590–0001. Hand
Delivery: Room PL–401 on the plaza
level of the Nassif Building, 400
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC. It
is requested, but not required, that two
copies of the comments be provided.
The Docket Section is open on
weekdays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. except
Federal Holidays. Comments may be
submitted electronically by logging onto
the Docket Management System Web
site at http://dms.dot.gov. Click on
‘‘Help’’ to obtain instructions for filing
the document electronically. Comments
may be faxed to 1–202–493–2251, or
may be submitted to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
The petition, supporting materials,
and all comments received before the
close of business on the closing date
indicated below will be filed and will be
considered. All comments and
supporting materials received after the
closing date will also be filed and will
be considered to the extent possible.
When the petition is granted or denied,
notice of the decision will be published
in the Federal Register pursuant to the
authority indicated below.
Comment closing date: February 13,
2006.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120:
delegations of authority at CFR 1.50 and
501.8.
PO 00000 Frm 00094 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\12JAN1.SGM
Issued on: January 9, 2006.
Daniel C. Smith,
Associate Administrator for Enforcement.
[FR Doc. E6–234 Filed 1–11–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Surface Transportation Board
[STB Finance Docket No. 34807]
Richard D. Robey—Continuance in
Control Exemption—Susquehanna
Valley Railroad Corporation and
Stourbridge Railroad Company
Richard D. Robey, a noncarrier
individual, has filed a verified notice of
exemption to continue in control of
Susquehanna Valley Railroad
Corporation (SVRC), a newly
incorporated holding company, and
Stourbridge Railroad Company
(Stourbridge).
The transaction was scheduled to be
consummated on or after January 1,
2006.
At the time of filing, Mr. Robey was
the sole shareholder and owner of eight
Class III railroads: Stourbridge, Juniata
Valley Railroad Company, Lycoming
Valley Railroad Company, Nittany &
Bald Eagle Railroad Company, North
Shore Railroad Company, Wellsboro &
Corning Railroad Company, Union
County Industrial Railroad Company,
and Shamokin Valley Railroad
Company. In a related transaction,
SVRC has filed a verified notice of
exemption to acquire control of all of
the above Class III railroads, except
Stourbridge, which Mr. Robey will
continue to control directly.
Mr. Robey states that: (i) The railroads
do not connect with each other or any
railroads in their corporate family; (ii)
The continuance in control is not part
of a series of anticipated transactions
that would connect the railroads with
each other or any other railroad in their
corporate family; and (iii) The
transaction does not involve a Class I
railroad. Therefore, the transaction is
exempt from the prior approval
requirements of 49 U.S.C. 11323. See 49
CFR 1180.2(d)(2).
Under 49 U.S.C. 10502(g), the Board
may not use its exemption authority to
relieve a rail carrier of its statutory
obligation to protect the interests of its
employees. Section 11326(c), however,
does not provide for labor protection for
transactions under sections 11324 and
11325 that involve only Class III rail
carriers. Accordingly, the Board may not
impose labor protective conditions here,
because all of the carriers involved are
Class III carriers.
12JAN1
 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 8 / Thursday, January 12, 2006 / Notices
If the notice contains false or
misleading information, the exemption
is void ab initio. Petitions to revoke the
exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d)
may be filed at any time. The filing of
a petition to revoke will not
automatically stay the transaction.
An original and 10 copies of all
pleadings, referring to STB Finance
Docket No. 34807, must be filed with
the Surface Transportation Board, 1925
K Street, NW., Washington, DC 20423–
0001. In addition, a copy of each
pleading must be served on: Richard R.
Wilson, Esq., 127 Lexington Avenue,
Ste. 100, Altoona, PA 16601.
Board decisions and notices are
available on our Web site at http://
www.stb.dot.gov.
Decided: January 5, 2006.
By the Board, David M. Konschnik,
Director, Office of Proceedings.
Vernon A. Williams,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6–217 Filed 1–11–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Surface Transportation Board
[STB Finance Docket No. 34808]
Chicago Port Railroad Company—
Operation Exemption—Ozinga
Transportation
Chicago Port Railroad Company
(CPRR), a noncarrier, has filed a verified
notice of exemption under 49 CFR
1150.31 to operate approximately 1.3
miles of rail line owned by Ozinga
Transportation. The line consists of The
Calumet River Yard and the Transload
Facility trackage located adjacent to the
Calumet River in Chicago, IL, and does
not have milepost numbers.
CPRR certifies that its projected
annual revenues as a result of the
transaction do not exceed those that
would qualify it as a Class III rail
carrier.
The transaction was scheduled to be
consummated prior to January 1, 2006,
but consummation could lawfully occur
no earlier than December 23, 2005, the
effective date of the exemption (7 days
after the exemption was filed).
If the verified notice contains false or
misleading information, the exemption
is void ab initio. Petitions to revoke the
exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d)
may be filed at any time. The filing of
erjones on PROD1PC68 with NOTICES
a petition to revoke will not
automatically stay the transaction.
An original and 10 copies of all
pleadings, referring to STB Finance
Docket No. 34808, must be filed with
VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:02 Jan 11, 2006 Jkt 208001
the Surface Transportation Board, 1925
K Street, NW., Washington, DC 20423–
0001. In addition, a copy of each
pleading must be served on David C.
Dillon, Dillon & Nash, Ltd., 111 West
Washington Street, Suite 719, Chicago,
IL 60602.
Board decisions and notices are
available on our Web site at ‘‘http://
www.stb.dot.gov.’’
Decided: January 4, 2006.
By the Board, David M. Konschnik,
Director, Office of Proceedings.
Vernon A. Williams,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 06–232 Filed 1–11–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Surface Transportation Board
[STB Finance Docket No. 34799]
Permian Basin Railways, Inc.—
Acquisition of Control Exemption—
San Luis & Rio Grande Railroad
Company, Inc.
Permian Basin Railways, Inc.
(Permian), a noncarrier,1 has filed a
verified notice of exemption to acquire
control of Class III carrier San Luis &
Rio Grande Railroad Company, Inc.
(SLRG).2 SLRG is currently owned by
RailAmerica Transportation Corp.
(RTC), a short line railroad holding
company, indirectly controlled by
RailAmerica, Inc.3
The transaction was expected to be
consummated on or after December 22,
2005.
Permian states that: (1) The railroads
do not connect with each other or any
railroad in their corporate family; (2) the
transaction is not part of a series of
anticipated transactions that would
connect the railroads with each other or
any railroad in their corporate family;
and (3) the transaction does not involve
a Class I carrier. Therefore, the
1 Permian owns the stock of three existing Class
III short line railroads: West Texas and Lubbock
Railway Company, Inc., the Austin & Northwestern
Railroad Company, Inc. d/b/a Texas New Mexico
Railroad, and the Arizona Eastern Railway
Company, Inc.
2 A redacted version of the executed purchase and
sale agreement and all supporting documents was
filed with the notice of exemption. The full version
of the agreement, as required by 49 CFR
1180.6(a)(7)(ii), was concurrently filed under seal
along with a motion for a protective order. A
protective order was served on December 23, 2005.
3 RTC and RailAmerica formed SLRG in 2003 for
the purpose of acquiring the subject rail lines from
the Union Pacific Railroad Company. The Board
authorized SLRG’s acquisition of the subject lines
and RTC’s and RailAmerica’s control of SLRG in
STB Finance Docket Nos. 34350 and 34352,
respectively.
PO 00000 Frm 00095 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\12JAN1.SGM
2107
transaction is exempt from the prior
approval requirements of 49 U.S.C.
11323. See 49 CFR 1180.2(d)(2).
Under 49 U.S.C. 10502(g), the Board
may not use its exemption authority to
relieve a rail carrier of its statutory
obligation to protect the interests of its
employees. Section 11326(c), however,
does not provide for labor protection for
transactions under sections 11324 and
11325 that involve only Class III rail
carriers. Accordingly, the Board may not
impose labor protective conditions here,
because all of the carriers involved are
Class III carriers.
If the notice contains false or
misleading information, the exemption
is void ab initio. Petitions to revoke the
exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d)
may be filed at any time. The filing of
a petition to revoke will not
automatically stay the transaction.
An original and 10 copies of all
pleadings, referring to STB Finance
Docket No. 34799, must be filed with
the Surface Transportation Board, 1925
K Street, NW., Washington, DC 20423–
0001. In addition, a copy of all
pleadings must be served on John D.
Heffner, 1920 N Street, NW., Suite 800,
Washington, DC 20036.
Board decisions and notices are
available on our Web site at ‘‘http://
www.stb.dot.gov.’’
Decided: January 5, 2006.
By the Board, David M. Konschnik,
Director, Office of Proceedings.
Vernon A. Williams,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 06–231 Filed 1–11–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Submission for OMB Review;
Comment Request
January 6, 2006.
The Department of Treasury has
submitted the following public
information collection requirement(s) to
OMB for review and clearance under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
Public Law 104–13. Copies of the
submission(s) may be obtained by
calling the Treasury Bureau Clearance
Officer listed. Comments regarding this
information collection should be
addressed to the OMB reviewer listed
and to the Treasury Department
Clearance Officer, Department of the
Treasury, Room 11000, 1750
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20220.
DATES: Written comments should be
received on or before February 13, 2006
to be assured of consideration.
12JAN1