Rules and Regulations. Announcement of grants for child safety and child booster seats

9,396 words·~43 min read·/register/2006/01/31/06-905

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

BILLING CODE 4910-57-M DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [Docket No. NHTSA-2006-23628] Child Safety and Child Booster Seats Incentive Grants AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT. ACTION: Announcement of grants for child safety and child booster seats. SUMMARY: The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) announces a grant program under Section 2011 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act—A Legacy of Users (SAFETEA-LU) to implement programs to purchase and distribute child restraints, support enforcement of child restraint laws, train child passenger safety professionals concerning all aspects of child restraint use, and educate the public concerning the proper use and installation of child restraints.

This notice solicits applications from the fifty States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. DATES: Applications must be received by the office designated below on or before July 1 of the applicable fiscal year. ADDRESSES: Applications must be submitted to the appropriate National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Regional Administrator. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For program issues: Judy Hammond, Injury Control Operations and Resources, NTI-200, telephone

(202)366-2121, fax

(202)366-7394. For legal issues: David Bonelli, Office of Chief Counsel, NCC-113, telephone

(202)366-1834, fax

(202)366-3820, NHTSA, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Incentive Grants for Child Safety Seats and Child Booster Seats Section 2011 of SAFETEA-LU (Pub. L. 109-59) establishes an incentive grant program for child safety seats and child booster seats. To qualify for grant funds, States must “enforc[e] a law requiring that any child riding in a passenger motor vehicle in the State who is too large to be secured in a child safety seat be secured in a child restraint that meets the requirements prescribed by the Secretary under section 3 of Anton's Law.” Prior to Anton's Law, NHTSA's performance requirements for child safety seats covered children weighing only up to 50 pounds. 1 Anton's Law (Pub. L. 107-318) was enacted to improve the safety and use of child restraints for children between the ages of 4 and 8. To accomplish these purposes, Congress directed the Department of Transportation, in Section 3 of Anton's Law, to make Federal performance requirements applicable to child restraints recommended for children weighing more than 50 pounds. On June 3, 2003, pursuant to this mandate, NHTSA published a final rule setting performance requirements for child restraints recommended for children weighing up to 65 pounds. 2 1 These performance requirements were established using a 6-year-old child dummy. The weight of the dummy is 51.6 pounds. According to U.S. Department of Health & Human Services statistics, 51.7 pounds is the average weight of a 6-year-old child. Cynthia L. Ogden, Ph.D., *et al* , U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Mean Body Weight, Height, and Body Mass Index, United States 1960-2002 (2004). 2 The 2003 performance requirements were established using a 6-year-old child dummy modified through the addition of weight (10.4 pounds) to represent approximately the weight of an 8-year-old child. The Section 2011 grant program advances the purposes of Anton's Law by awarding funds to States that extend their child restraint laws to cover children who are too large to fit in child safety seats. Based on the final rule promulgated under Section 3 of Anton's Law, Section 2011 requires States to enforce child restraint laws whose coverage extends to children weighing up to 65 lbs. Virtually all State child restraint laws use the age of the child as a means of specifying the children required to be secured in child restraints. However, not all State laws use the weight of the child in defining coverage. Moreover, enforcing a child restraint law based on the age of the child is likely to be more practicable for State and local enforcement officials. For these reasons, we are defining our grant criteria according to the age that correlates to a 65-pound child. According to the most recent U.S. Department of Health & Human Services

(DHHS)publication on average body weight for children, the average weight of a 7-year-old child is 59.8 pounds and the average weight of an 8-year-old child is 72 pounds. 3 On the basis of this information, we have selected 7 years old as the age that is reasonably representative of a 65-pound child for the purposes of this grant program. 3 OGDEN, supra note 1, at 3. Minimum Requirements for a Grant To qualify for a grant under this program, therefore, a State must enact and enforce a law requiring that any child riding in a passenger motor vehicle ( *i.e.* , a passenger car, pickup truck, van, minivan or sport utility vehicle) who is under 8 years of age be secured in a child restraint. A child restraint includes a child safety seat, as defined in 23 U.S.C. 405(f), and a booster seat, as defined in 49 CFR 571.213. The State child restraint law must allow enforcement officials to stop or detain a passenger motor vehicle and issue a citation upon observation that a child under 8 years of age is not properly secured in a child restraint, without the need for probable cause to believe that another violation has been committed. Reading Section 2011 in conjunction with the findings under Anton's Law (Section 2), it is clear that Congress intended States to have continuous coverage for all children subject to the safety restraint requirement. Therefore, to qualify for a grant under this program, a State child restraint law must not leave any gaps in coverage for children under 8 years of age ( *e.g.* , gaps between coverage by a child safety seat and a booster seat). Such gaps would be incongruous with the purpose of the grant program. Finally, while all States define coverage under their child restraint laws according to the age of the child, several States include weight and/or height requirements. These laws typically permit children who have attained a certain weight or height to be exempted from child restraint requirements regardless of age. Consistent with the final rule published under Section 3 of Anton's Law, a State law covering children under 8 years of age, but excluding children who have attained a weight in excess of 65 pounds, will not be deemed ineligible under this grant program. In addition, consistent with long-standing NHTSA guidance on booster seat usage, a State law covering children under 8 years of age, but excluding children who have attained a height of 4 feet, 9 inches or taller will not be deemed ineligible under this grant program. Exemptions While NHTSA does not require or encourage the adoption of exemptions, the agency notes that many existing child restraint laws contain a number of exemptions. The agency believes that the Section 2011 program's goal of increasing the use of child restraints would not be served by denying a grant to States whose laws contain exemptions, without regard to the nature of those exemptions. On the other hand, some exemptions would so severely undermine the safety considerations underlying the grant program as to render a State whose law contains such exemptions ineligible for a grant. The agency will review each State's child restraint law to determine the acceptability of any exemptions. In keeping with NHTSA's practice in 1998 to implement the Section 405 grant program under the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), the agency has reviewed existing child restraint laws and has determined that the following exemptions are not incompatible with the requirements of SAFETEA-LU: • Children with medical conditions who are unable to use a child restraint, provided there is written documentation from a physician; • Children riding in a passenger motor vehicle that is not required to be equipped with safety belts. The agency has accepted these exemptions by long-standing application in safety belt grant programs. A State that enacts a law with any exemption other than these should anticipate that the agency will review the exemption to determine whether its impact on traffic safety is minimal and it is, therefore, acceptable. Eligibility Each of the fifty United States, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico (“States”) may submit an application under this program. Application Procedures First Year Requirements To apply for grant funds, a State must submit the certifications required by Appendix 1, signed by the Governor's Representative for Highway Safety, to the appropriate NHTSA Regional Administrator no later than July 1 of the fiscal year. Subsequent Year Requirements To demonstrate compliance with this criterion in subsequent years a State receives grant funds:

(a)If the State's law has not changed, the State must submit the certifications required by Appendix 2, signed by the Governor's Representative for Highway Safety, to the appropriate NHTSA Regional Administrator no later than July 1 of the fiscal year.

(b)If the State's law has changed, the State must submit the certifications required by Appendix 1, signed by the Governor's Representative for Highway Safety, to the appropriate NHTSA Regional Administrator no later than July 1 of the fiscal year. A State seeking to determine whether an existing or proposed child restraint law qualifies under the grant program may submit its law prior to July 1 for preliminary review by the agency. Award Procedures Each fiscal year (FY), a grant will be made to an eligible State upon submission and approval of the application required by this notice. As specified by SAFETEA-LU, the amount of a grant to a State in each fiscal year shall not exceed 25 percent of the amount apportioned to the State for FY 2003 under 23 U.S.C. 402. The release of grant funds shall be subject to the availability of funding for that fiscal year. As required by SAFETEA-LU, in the first 3 fiscal years for which a State receives a grant, it shall be reimbursed for up to 75 percent of the costs of programs and activities authorized by Section 2011(d) of SAFETEA-LU, and in the fourth fiscal year for which a State receives a grant, it shall be reimbursed for up to 50 percent of the costs of programs and activities authorized by Section 2011(d) of SAFETEA-LU. Use of Grant Funds As specified by SAFETEA-LU, eligible uses of grant funds may include any of the following: 1. Programs for Purchasing and Distributing Child Restraints to Low-Income Families States may use grant funds for programs to purchase and distribute child restraints to low-income families. However, as required by SAFETEA-LU, not more than 50 percent of the funds received in a fiscal year may be used for these programs. The child restraints purchased and distributed must be certified to meet applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. Low income is calculated at 185 percent of the Federal poverty level. A certified child passenger safety technician/instructor should supervise all child restraint distribution programs and ensure that adequate training based on the Standardized Curriculum is provided to those distributing the selected seats. The certified child passenger safety technician/instructor should also ensure that appropriate training is provided to the recipients of the seats. 2. Programs to Support Enforcement of Child Restraint Laws States may use grant funds to carry out a program to support enforcement of child restraint laws. A successful enforcement program should increase enforcement efforts during national high-visibility law enforcement mobilization campaigns and Child Passenger Safety

(CPS)week. 3. Programs To Train Child Safety Professionals, Police Officers, Fire and Emergency Medical Personnel, Educators, and Parents Concerning All Aspects of the Use of Child Restraints States may use grant funds to carry out a program to train child passenger safety professionals, police officers, fire and emergency medical personnel, educators, parents, and caregivers concerning all aspects of the use of child restraints. When training participants to become national Child Passenger Safety Technicians and/or Instructors, States must use the NHTSA Standardized Child Passenger Safety Training Program with training certification through the national certifying body. States are encouraged to conduct Child Passenger Safety awareness training using NHTSA approved courses. 4. Programs To Educate the Public Concerning the Proper Use and Installation of Child Restraints States may use grant funds to carry out a program to educate the public concerning the proper use and installation of child restraints. States should develop and sustain a cadre of current nationally certified Child Passenger Safety Technicians to serve the public by staffing inspection stations/check-up events/clinics. States should distribute public information and education materials to the public. States should use NHTSA-developed materials that provide information on all the “steps” of child restraints, including infant seats, convertible seats, forward-facing seats, booster seats and safety belts, and should include information on selection, direction, installation and location. Financial Requirements Within 30 days after notification of an award, but in no event later than September 12, a State must submit electronically to the agency a Program Cost Summary (HS Form 217) obligating the funds to this program. A Program Cost Summary is necessary to ensure proper accounting for the Federal funds and is a precondition to receiving grant funds. Additionally, each fiscal year until all grant funds are expended, the State must document how it intends to use the funds in the Highway Safety Plan it submits pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 402 (or in an amendment to that plan). Reporting Requirements A State that receives a grant is required by SAFETEA-LU to submit a report describing how funds were obligated and expended. Each fiscal year until all Child Restraint grant funds are expended, a State must include this report in the Annual Report it submits for its highway safety program pursuant to 23 CFR 1200.33. For each of the eligible uses of grant funds selected by the State, include the following: 1. For programs to purchase and distribute child restraints for low-income families: a. A description of the programs used to purchase and distribute child restraints for low-income families. b. The number of child restraints distributed. 2. For programs to support enforcement of child restraint laws: a. A description of the programs used to support enforcement of child restraint laws. b. A list of participating law enforcement agencies and the counties they serve. 3. For programs to train child passenger safety professionals: a. A description of the training classes conducted and the curricula used to train individuals and groups. b. The number and location of training classes conducted and the individuals or groups trained. c. The number of child passenger safety technicians certified. 4. For programs to educate the public: a. A description of the programs used to educate the public concerning the proper use and installation of child restraints. b. A list of child restraint inspection stations/check-up events/clinics, including their locations. c. An estimate of the number of child restraints checked at inspection stations/check-up events/clinics. APPENDIX 1—CHILD RESTRAINT PROGRAM CETIFICATION FORM—NEW OR CHANGED LAW State: Fiscal Year: I hereby certify that the child restaint law, available at (include legal citations to all relevant provisions) is (check one): □ in effect and being enforced, □ will be in effect on

(date)and will be enforced on

(date)and that the State (or Commonwealth) of: • will use the child restraint grant funds awarded exclusively to implement programs in accordance with the requirements of Section 2011(d) of SAFETEA-LU, Pub. L. 109-59; • will administer the child restraint grant funds in accordance with 49 CFR Part 18; • will provide to the NHTSA Regional Administrator a report describing the activities executed with child restraint grant funds and the accomplishments of the fiscal year; and • will maintain its aggregate expenditures from all other sources for child restraint programs at or above the average level of such expenditures in State or Federal fiscal years

(FY)2003 and 2004. Governor's Highway Safety Representative Date: APPENDIX 2—CHILD RESTRAINT PROGRAM CERTIFICATION FORM—UNCHANGED LAW State: Fiscal Year: I hereby certify that the State (or Commonwealth) of • is enforcing a child restraint law that has been approved by NHTSA to conform to the requirements of Section 2011(d) of SAFETEA-LU, Pub. L. 109-59 and that has remained unchanged since that approval; • will use the child restraint grant funds awarded exclusively to implement programs in accordance with the requirements of Section 2011(d) of SAFETEA-LU, Pub. L. 109-59; • will administer the child restraint grant funds in accordance with 49 CFR Part 18; • will provide to the NHTSA Regional Administrator a report describing the activities executed with child restraint grant funds and the accomplishments of the fiscal year; and • will maintain its aggregate expenditures from all other sources for child restraint programs at or above the average level of such expenditures in State or Federal fiscal years

(FY)2003 and 2004. Governor's Highway Safety Representative Date: Issued on: January 25, 2006. Jacqueline Glassman, Deputy Administrator. [FR Doc. E6-1156 Filed 1-30-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-59-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [Docket No. NHTSA-2006-23698] Notice of Receipt of Petition for Decision That Nonconforming 2002-2005 Mercedes Benz CLK-Class

(209)Passenger Cars Are Eligible for Importation AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT. ACTION: Notice of receipt of petition for decision that nonconforming 2002-2005 Mercedes Benz CLK-class

(209)passenger cars are eligible for importation. SUMMARY: This document announces receipt by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) of a petition for a decision that 2002-2005 Mercedes Benz CLK-class

(209)passenger cars that were not originally manufactured to comply with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards are eligible for importation into the United States because

(1)they are substantially similar to vehicles that were originally manufactured for importation into and sale in the United States and that were certified by their manufacturer as complying with the safety standards, and

(209)passenger cars are eligible for importation into the United States. The vehicles which J.K. believes are substantially similar are 2002-2005 Mercedes Benz CLK-class

(209)passenger cars that were manufactured for importation into, and sale in, the United States and certified by their manufacturer as conforming to all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. The petitioner claims that it carefully compared non-U.S. certified 2002-2005 Mercedes Benz CLK-class

(209)passenger cars to their U.S.-certified counterparts, and found the vehicles to be substantially similar with respect to compliance with most Federal motor vehicle safety standards. J.K. submitted information with its petition intended to demonstrate that non-U.S. certified 2002-2005 Mercedes Benz CLK-class

(209)passenger cars, as originally manufactured, conform to many Federal motor vehicle safety standards in the same manner as their U.S. certified counterparts, or are capable of being readily altered to conform to those standards. Specifically, the petitioner claims that non-U.S. certified 2002-2005 Mercedes Benz CLK-class

(209)passenger cars are identical to their U.S. certified counterparts with respect to compliance with Standard Nos. 102 *Transmission Shift Lever Sequence, Starter Interlock, and Transmission Braking Effect,* 103 *Windshield Defrosting and Defogging Systems,* 104 *Windshield Wiping and Washing Systems,* 106 *Brake Hoses,* 109 *New Pneumatic Tires,* 113 *Hood Latch System,* 116 *Motor Vehicle Brake Fluids,* 124 *Accelerator Control Systems,* 135 *Passenger Car Brake Systems,* 201 *Occupant Protection in Interior Impact,* 202 *Head Restraints,* 204 *Steering Control Rearward Displacement,* 205 *Glazing Materials,* 206 *Door Locks and Door Retention Components,* 207 *Seating Systems,* 210 *Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages,* 212 *Windshield Mounting,* 214 *Side Impact Protection,* 216 *Roof Crush Resistance,* 219 *Windshield Zone Intrusion,* and 302 *Flammability of Interior Materials.* The petitioner also contends that the vehicles are capable of being readily altered to meet the following standards, in the manner indicated: Standard No. 101 *Controls and Displays:* Installation of a U.S.-model instrument cluster and cruise control lever. U.S. version software must also be downloaded to meet the requirements of this standard. Standard No. 108 *Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated Equipment:* Inspection of all vehicles and installation, on vehicles that are not already so equipped, of U.S.-model lamps, reflective devices, and associated equipment. Standard No. 110 *Tire Selection and Rims:* Installation of a tire information placard. Standard No. 111 *Rearview Mirrors:* Installation of a U.S.-model passenger side rearview mirror, or inscription of the required warning statement on the face of that mirror. Standard No. 114 *Theft Protection:* Installation of U.S. version software to meet the requirements of this standard. Standard No. 118 *Power-Operated Window, Partition, and Roof Panel Systems:* Installation of U.S. version software, or installation of a supplemental relay system to meet the requirements of the standard. Standard No. 208 *Occupant Crash Protection:*

(a)Inspection of all vehicles and replacement of any non U.S.-model seat belts, air bag control units, air bags, sensors, and knee bolsters with U.S.-model components on vehicles that are not already so equipped, and

(b)reprogramming the vehicle computer to the U.S.-mode to ensure compliance with the standard. The petitioner states that the occupant restraints used in these vehicles consist of dual front airbags and combination lap and shoulder belts at the front and rear outboard seating positions. These manual systems are automatic, self- tensioning, and are released by means of a single red push-button. Standard No. 209 *Seat Belt Assemblies:* Inspection of all vehicles and replacement of any non-U.S.-model seat belts with U.S.-model components on vehicles that are not already so equipped. Standard No. 225 *Child Restraint Anchorage Systems:* Inspection of all vehicles and installation of U.S.-model components on vehicles that are not already so equipped. Standard No. 301 *Fuel System Integrity:* Inspection of all vehicles and installation of U.S.-model components on vehicles that are not already so equipped. Standard No. 401 *Interior Trunk Release:* Inspection of all vehicles and installation of U.S.-model components on vehicles that are not already so equipped. The petitioner also states that all vehicles will be inspected for conformity with the Bumper Standard found in 49 CFR part 581 and that any non-U.S.-model components necessary for conformity with this standard will be replaced with U.S.-model components. The petitioner additionally states that a vehicle identification plate must be affixed to the vehicles near the left windshield post to meet the requirements of 49 CFR part 565. Interested persons are invited to submit comments on the petition described above. Comments should refer to the docket number and be submitted to: Docket Management, Room PL-401, 400 Seventh St., SW., Washington, DC 20590. [Docket hours are from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.]. 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. Claude H. Harris, Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. [FR Doc. E6-1184 Filed 1-30-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-59-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [Docket No. NHTSA-2006-23699] Notice of Receipt of Petition for Decision That Nonconforming 2005 and 2006 Ferrari F430 Passenger Cars Manufactured Before September 1, 2006 Are Eligible for Importation AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT. ACTION: Notice of receipt of petition for decision that nonconforming 2005 and 2006 Ferrari F430 passenger cars manufactured before September 1, 2006 are eligible for importation. SUMMARY: This document announces receipt by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) of a petition for a decision that 2005 and 2006 Ferrari F430 passenger cars manufactured before September 1, 2006 that were not originally manufactured to comply with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards are eligible for importation into the United States because

(2)they are capable of being readily altered to conform to the standards. DATES: The closing date for comments on the petition is March 2, 2006. ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to the docket number and notice number, and be submitted to: Docket Management, Room PL-401, 400 Seventh St., SW., Washington, DC 20590. [Docket hours are from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.]. Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the **Federal Register** published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78) or you may visit *http://dms.dot.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Coleman Sachs, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, NHTSA (202-366-3151). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Under 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A), 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, 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** . J.K. Technologies, LLC, of Baltimore, Maryland (“J.K.”)(Registered Importer 90-006) has petitioned NHTSA to decide whether nonconforming 2005 and 2006 Ferrari F430 passenger cars manufactured before September 1, 2006 are eligible for importation into the United States. The vehicles which J.K. believes are substantially similar are 2005 and 2006 Ferrari F430 passenger cars manufactured before September 1, 2006 that were manufactured for importation into, and sale in, the United States and certified by their manufacturer as conforming to all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. The petitioner claims that it carefully compared non-U.S. certified 2005 and 2006 Ferrari F430 passenger cars manufactured before September 1, 2006 to their U.S.-certified counterparts, and found the vehicles to be substantially similar with respect to compliance with most Federal motor vehicle safety standards. J.K. submitted information with its petition intended to demonstrate that non-U.S. certified 2005 and 2006 Ferrari F430 passenger cars manufactured before September 1, 2006, as originally manufactured, conform to many Federal motor vehicle safety standards in the same manner as their U.S. certified counterparts, or are capable of being readily altered to conform to those standards. Specifically, the petitioner claims that non-U.S. certified 2005 and 2006 Ferrari F430 passenger cars manufactured before September 1, 2006 are identical to their U.S. certified counterparts with respect to compliance with Standard Nos. 102 *Transmission Shift Lever Sequence, Starter Interlock, and Transmission Braking Effect,* 103 *Windshield Defrosting and Defogging Systems,* 104 *Windshield Wiping and Washing Systems,* 106 *Brake Hoses,* 109 *New Pneumatic Tires,* 113 *Hood Latch System,* 116 *Motor Vehicle Brake Fluids,* 118 *Power-Operated Window, Partition, and Roof Panel Systems,* 124 *Accelerator Control Systems,* 135 *Passenger Car Brake Systems,* 201 *Occupant Protection in Interior Impact,* 202 *Head Restraints,* 204 *Steering Control Rearward Displacement,* 205 *Glazing Materials,* 206 *Door Locks and Door Retention Components,* 210 *Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages,* 212 *Windshield Mounting,* 214 *Side Impact Protection,* 216 *Roof Crush Resistance,* 219 *Windshield Zone Intrusion,* 302 *Flammability of Interior Materials,* and 401 *Interior Trunk Release.* The petitioner states that the vehicles also conform to the Bumper Standard found in 49 CFR part 581. The petitioner also contends that the vehicles are capable of being readily altered to meet the following standards, in the manner indicated: Standard No. 101 *Controls and Displays:* installation of a U.S.-model instrument cluster. U.S. version software must also be downloaded to meet the requirements of this standard. Standard No. 108 *Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated Equipment:* installation of U.S.-model:

(a)Headlamps;

(b)front side marker lamps;

(c)rear side marker lamps; and

(d)taillamp assemblies or modification of existing taillamps to conform to the standard. Standard No. 110 *Tire Selection and Rims:* Installation of a tire information placard. Standard No. 111 *Rearview Mirrors:* Installation of a U.S.-model passenger side rearview mirror, or inscription of the required warning statement on the face of that mirror. Standard No. 114 *Theft Protection:* Installation of U.S. version software to meet the requirements of this standard. Standard No. 207 *Seating Systems:* Inspection of all vehicles and replacement of any non-U.S.-model components with U.S.-model components on vehicles that are not already so equipped. Standard No. 208 *Occupant Crash Protection:* Installation of U.S. version software to ensure that the seat belt warning system meets the requirements of this standard. Petitioner states that the vehicle's restraint system components include dual front airbags, and combination lap and shoulder belts at the outboard front designated seating positions. Standard No. 209 *Seat Belt Assemblies:* Inspection of all vehicles and replacement of any non-U.S.-model seat belts with U.S.-model components on vehicles that are not already so equipped. Standard No. 225 *Child Restraint Anchorage Systems:* Installation of U.S.-model tether anchorages in coupe model. Standard No. 301 *Fuel System Integrity:* Inspection of all vehicles and replacement of any non-U.S.-model components with U.S.-model components on vehicles that are not already so equipped. The petitioner additionally states that a vehicle identification plate must be affixed to the vehicles near the left windshield post to meet the requirements of 49 CFR part 565. Interested persons are invited to submit comments on the petition described above. Comments should refer to the docket number and be submitted to: Docket Management, Room PL-401, 400 Seventh St., SW., Washington, DC 20590. [Docket hours are from 9 am to 5 pm]. 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. Claude H. Harris, Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. [FR Doc. E6-1181 Filed 1-30-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-59-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [Docket No. NHTSA-2006-23701] Notice of Receipt of Petition for Decision That Nonconforming 2005 Toyota RAV4 Multipurpose Passenger Vehicles are Eligible for Importation AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT. ACTION: Notice of receipt of petition for decision that nonconforming 2005 Toyota RAV4 multipurpose passenger vehicles are eligible for importation. SUMMARY: This document announces receipt by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) of a petition for a decision that 2005 Toyota RAV4 multipurpose passenger vehicles that were not originally manufactured to comply with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards are eligible for importation into the United States because

(2)they are capable of being readily altered to conform to the standards. DATES: The closing date for comments on the petition is March 2, 2006. ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to the docket number and notice number, and be submitted to: Docket Management, Room PL-401, 400 Seventh St., SW., Washington, DC 20590. [Docket hours are from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.]. Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the **Federal Register** published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78) or you may visit *http://dms.dot.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Coleman Sachs, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, NHTSA (202-366-3151). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Under 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A), 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, 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.** J.K. Technologies, LLC, of Baltimore, Maryland (“J.K.”) (Registered Importer 90-006) has petitioned NHTSA to decide whether nonconforming 2005 Toyota RAV4 multipurpose passenger vehicles are eligible for importation into the United States. The vehicles which J.K. believes are substantially similar are 2005 Toyota RAV4 multipurpose passenger vehicles that were manufactured for importation into, and sale in, the United States and certified by their manufacturer as conforming to all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. The petitioner claims that it carefully compared non-U.S. certified 2005 Toyota RAV4 multipurpose passenger vehicles to their U.S.-certified counterparts, and found the vehicles to be substantially similar with respect to compliance with most Federal motor vehicle safety standards. J.K. submitted information with its petition intended to demonstrate that non-U.S. certified 2005 Toyota RAV4 multipurpose passenger vehicles, as originally manufactured, conform to many Federal motor vehicle safety standards in the same manner as their U.S. certified counterparts, or are capable of being readily altered to conform to those standards. Specifically, the petitioner claims that non-U.S. certified 2005 Toyota RAV4 multipurpose passenger vehicles are identical to their U.S. certified counterparts with respect to compliance with Standard Nos. 102 *Transmission Shift Lever Sequence, Starter Interlock, and Transmission Braking Effect,* 103 *Windshield Defrosting and Defogging Systems,* 104 *Windshield Wiping and Washing Systems,* 106 *Brake Hoses,* 113 *Hood Latch System,* 116 *Motor Vehicle Brake Fluids,* 119 *New Pneumatic Tires for Vehicles Other than Passenger Cars,* 124 *Accelerator Control Systems,* 135 *Passenger Car Brake Systems,* 201 *Occupant Protection in Interior Impact,* 202 *Head Restraints,* 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,* 212 *Windshield Mounting,* 214 *Side Impact Protection,* 216 *Roof Crush Resistance,* 219 *Windshield Zone Intrusion,* 301 *Fuel System Integrity,* and 302 *Flammability of Interior Materials.* The petitioner also contends that the vehicles are capable of being readily altered to meet the following standards, in the manner indicated: Standard No. 101 *Controls and Displays:* Installation of a U.S.-model instrument cluster. U.S. version software must also be downloaded to meet the requirements of this standard. Standard No. 108 *Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated Equipment:* Installation of U.S.-model:

(a)Headlamps;

(b)front side marker lights;

(c)rear side marker lights; and

(d)taillamp assemblies or modification of existing taillamps to conform to the standard. Standard No. 111 *Rearview Mirrors:* Installation of a U.S.-model passenger side rearview mirror, or inscription of the required warning statement on the face of that mirror. Standard No. 114 *Theft Protection:* Installation of U.S. version software to meet the requirements of this standard. Standard No. 118 *Power-Operated Window, Partition, and Roof Panel Systems:* Installation of U.S. version software. 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)Inspection of all vehicles and replacement of any non U.S.-model seat belts, air bag control units, air bags, and sensors with U.S.-model components on vehicles that are not already so equipped, and;

(b)installation of U.S. version software to ensure that the seat belt warning system meets the requirements of this standard. Petitioner states that the vehicle's restraint system components include U.S.-model airbags and knee bolsters, and combination lap and shoulder belts at the outboard front designated seating positions. Standard No. 225 *Child Restraint Anchorage Systems,* inspection of all vehicles and installation, on vehicles that are not already so equipped, of U.S.-model components to meet the requirements of this standard. The petitioner additionally states that a vehicle identification plate must be affixed to the vehicles near the left windshield post to meet the requirements of 49 CFR Part 565. Interested persons are invited to submit comments on the petition described above. Comments should refer to the docket number and be submitted to: Docket Management, Room PL-401, 400 Seventh St., SW., Washington, DC 20590. [Docket hours are from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.]. 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. Claude H. Harris, Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. [FR Doc. E6-1183 Filed 1-30-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-59-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [Docket No. NHTSA-2006-23684; Notice 1] Continental Tire North America, Inc., Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance Continental Tire North America, Inc. (Continental Tire) has determined that certain tires it produced in 2004 and 2005 do not comply with S5.5(d) of 49 CFR 571.139, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 139, “New pneumatic radial tires for light vehicles.” Continental Tire 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), Continental Tire 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 Continental Tire's 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 2,500 model 235/85R16 C Grabber TR tires manufactured in 2004 and 2005. S5.5(d) of FMVSS No. 139 requires that each tire must be marked on each sidewall with the maximum load rating. The noncompliant tires are marked on the sidewall “max load single 1380 kg (3042 lbs)” whereas the correct marking should be “max load single 1400 kg (3085 lbs).” Continental Tire believes that the noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety and that no corrective action is warranted. Continental Tire states, All other sidewall identification markings and safety information is correct. A consumer acting on the incorrect information would underload the vehicle by 20 kg per tire. This incorrect load capacity molding does not affect the safety, performance and durability of the tire; the tire was built as designed. 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: March 2, 2006. Authority: (49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: Delegations of authority at CFR 1.50 and 501.8) Issued on: January 24, 2006. Daniel C. Smith, Associate Administrator for Enforcement. [FR Doc. E6-1161 Filed 1-30-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-59-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Surface Transportation Board [STB Ex Parte No. 290 (Sub-No. 4)] Railroad Cost Recovery Procedures-Productivity Adjustment AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board, DOT. ACTION: Proposed adoption of a Railroad Cost Recovery Procedures-productivity adjustment. SUMMARY: The Surface Transportation Board proposes to adopt 1.019 (1.9%) as the measure of average change in railroad productivity for the 2000-2004 (5-year) averaging period. This value is a decline of 1% from the current measure of 2.9% that was developed for the 1999-2003 period. DATES: Comments are due February 15, 2006. *Effective Date:* The proposed productivity adjustment is effective March 1, 2006. ADDRESSES: Send comments (an original and 10 copies) referring to STB Ex Parte No. 290 (Sub-No. 4) to: Surface Transportation Board, 1925 K Street, NW., Washington, DC 20423-0001. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: H. Jeff Warren,

(202)565-1533. [Federal Information Relay Service

(FIRS)for the hearing impaired: 1-800-877-8339.] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Additional information is contained in the Board's decision, which is available on our Web site *http://www.stb.dot.gov* . To purchase a copy of the full decision, write to, e-mail or call the Board's contractor, ASAP Document Solutions; 9332 Annapolis Rd., Suite 103, Lanham, MD 20706; e-mail: *asapdc@verizon.net* ; phone:

(202)306-4004. [Assistance for the hearing impaired is available through FIRS: 1-800-877-8339.] This action will not significantly affect either the quality of the human environment or energy conservation. Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b), we conclude that our action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities within the meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Decided: January 23, 2006. By the Board, Chairman Buttrey, and Vice Chairman Mulvey. Vernon A. Williams, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-1187 Filed 1-30-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4915-01-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request January 24, 2006. The Department of the 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 March 2, 2006 to be assured of consideration. Internal Revenue Service

(IRS)*OMB Number:* 1545-1146. *Type of Review:* Extension. *Title:* Applicable Conventions under the Accelerated Cost Recovery System PS-54-89 (Final). *Description:* The regulations describe the time and manner of making the notation required to be made on Form 4562 under certain circumstances when the taxpayer transfers property in certain non-recognition transactions. The information is necessary to monitor compliance with the section 168 rule. *Respondents:* Business or other for-profit and Farms. *Estimated Total Burden Hours:* 70 hours. *OMB Number:* 1545-1948. *Type of Review:* Extension. *Title:* One-Time Dividends Received Deduction for Certain Cash Dividends from Controlled Foreign Corporations. *Form:* IRS form 8895. *Description:* Form 8895 is used by a U.S. corporation to elect the 85% dividends received deduction provided under section 965 and to compute the DRD. *Respondents:* Business or other for-profit. *Estimated Total Burden Hours:* 50,020 hours. *OMB Number:* 1545-1957. *Type of Review:* Extension. *Title:* Notice 2005-64 Foreign Tax Credit and other Guidance under Section 965. *Description:* This document provide guidance under new section 965 enacted by the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 (Pub. L. 108-357). In general, and subject to limitations and conditions, section 965(a) provides that a corporation that is a U.S. shareholder of a controlled foreign corporation

(CFC)may elect, for one taxable year, an 85 percent dividends received deduction

(DRD)with respect to certain cash dividends it receives from its CFCs. Section 9650(f) provides that taxpayers may elect the application of section 965 for either the taxpayer's last taxable year which begins before October 22, 2004, or the taxpayer's first taxable year which begins during the one-year period beginning on October 22, 2004. *Respondents:* Business or other for-profit. *Estimated Total Burden Hours:* 250,000 hours. *OMB Number:* 1545-1956. *Type of Review:* Extension. *Title:* Rev. Proc. 2005-51, Revenue Procedure regarding I.R.C. 6707A(e) and Disclosure with the SEC. *Description:* This revenue procedure provides guidance to persons who are required to disclose payment of certain penalties arising from participation in reportable transactions on forms filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. *Respondents:* Business or other for-profit. *Estimated Total Burden Hours:* 429.50 hours. *Clearance Officer:* Glenn P. Kirkland,

(202)622-3428, Internal Revenue Service, Room 6516, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20224. *OMB Reviewer:* Alexander T. Hunt,

(202)395-7316, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503. Michael A. Robinson, Treasury PRA Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E6-1164 Filed 1-30-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request January 24, 2006. The Department of the 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 March 2, 2006 to be assured of consideration. Financial Management Service *OMB Number:* 1510-0042. *Type of Review:* Extension. *Title:* Claims against the U.S. for amounts due in case of a deceased creditor. *Form:* FMS form SF1055. *Description:* This form is required to determine who is entitled to funds of a deceased Postal Savings depositor or deceased award holder. The form properly completed with supporting documents enables this office to decide who is legally entitled to payment. *Respondents:* Individuals or households. *Estimated Total Burden Hours:* 180 hour. *Clearance Officer:* Jiovannah Diggs

(202)874-7662, Financial Management Service, Room 144, 3700 East West Highway, Hyattsville, MD 20782. *OMB Reviewer:* Alexander T. Hunt

(TTB)*OMB Number:* 1513-0083. *Type of Review:* Extension. *Title:* Excise Tax Return. *Form:* TTB form F 5000.24. *Description:* Businesses other than those in Puerto Rico report their Federal excise tax liability on distilled spirits, wine, beer, tobacco products, cigarette papers and tubes on TTB F 5000.24. TTB needs this form to identify the taxpayer and to determine the amount and type of taxes due and paid. *Respondents:* Business or other for-profit. *Estimated Total Burden Hours:* 22,500 hour. *OMB Number:* 1513-0118. *Type of Review:* Reinstatement. *Title:* Formulas for Fermented Beverage Products. *Description:* Formula information is necessary to protect the public and collect revenue. Brewers must submit written notices to obtain formula approval. *Respondents:* Business or other for-profit. *Estimated Total Burden Hours:* 500 hour. *Clearance Officer:* Frank Foote

(202)927-9347, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, Room 200 East, 1310 G Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005. *OMB Reviewer:* Alexander T. Hunt

(IRS)*OMB Number:* 1545-1191. *Type of Review:* Extension. *Title:* INTL-868-89 (Final) Information with Respect to Certain Foreign Owned Corporations. *Description:* The regulations require record maintenance, annual information filing, and the authorization of the U.S. corporation to act as an agent for IRS summons purposes. These requirements allow IRS International examiners to better audit the returns of U.S. corporations engaged in cross border transactions with a related party. *Respondents:* Business or other for-profit and Individuals or households. *Estimated Total Burden Hours:* 630,000 hours. *OMB Number:* 1545-1041. *Type of Review:* Extension. *Title:* PS-102-86 (Final) Cooperative Housing Corporations. *Description:* This regulation provides an elective alternative to the proportionate share rule for allocating interest and taxes to the tenant stockholders of cooperative housing corporations. *Respondents:* Business or other for-profit and Individuals or households. *Estimated Total Burden Hours:* 625 hours. *OMB Number:* 1545-1356. *Type of Review:* Extension. *Title:* REG-248770-96 (Final) Miscellaneous Sections affected by the Taxpayer Bill of Rights 2 and the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996. *Description:* The regulations provide guidance with respect to the recovery of administrative costs incurred in connection with an administrative proceeding before the Internal Revenue Service. Procedures that must be followed to recover such costs are set forth. *Respondents:* Business or other for-profit, Individuals or households, Not-for-profit institutions, Farms, Federal Government. *Estimated Total Burden Hours:* 86 hours. *OMB Number:* 1545-1681. *Type of Review:* Extension. *Title:* Qualifications & Availability Form. *Form:* IRS form A. *Description:* Form A is used by external applicants applying for clerical and technical positions with the Internal Revenue Service. Applicants will complete information relating to their address, job preference, veteran's preference and a series of occupational questions, knowledge and skills along with background information. *Respondents:* Individuals or households. *Estimated Total Burden Hours:* 45,000 hours. *OMB Number:* 1545-1948. *Type of Review:* Extension. *Title:* One-Time Dividends Received Deduction for Certain Cash Dividends from Controlled Foreign Corporation. *Form:* IRS form 8895. *Description:* Form 8895 is used by a U.S. corporation to elect the 85% dividends received deduction provided under section 965 and to compute the DRD. *Respondents:* Business or other for-profit. *Estimated Total Burden Hours:* 50,020 hours. *Clearance Officer:* Glenn P. Kirkland,

(202)622-3428, Internal Revenue Service, Room 6516, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20224. *OMB Reviewer:* Alexander T. Hunt,

(CCAC)public meeting and Public Forum scheduled for February 28, 2006. *Date:* February 28, 2006. *Time:* 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. *Location:* The United States Mint; 801 Ninth Street, NW.; Washington, DC; Second floor. *Subject:* Review of designs for the Presidential $1 Coin Program and other business. *Interested persons should call 202-354-7502 for the latest update on meeting time and room location.* The CCAC was established to: • Advise the Secretary of the Treasury on any theme or design proposals relating to circulating coinage, bullion coinage, Congressional Gold Medals, and national and other medals. • Advise the Secretary of the Treasury with regard to the events, persons, or places to be commemorated by the issuance of commemorative coins in each of the five calendar years succeeding the year in which a commemorative coin designation is made. • Make recommendations with respect to the mintage level for any commemorative coin recommended. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joyce Harris, United States Mint Liaison to the CCAC; 801 Ninth Street, NW.; Washington, DC 20220; or call 202-354-7200. Any member of the public interested in submitting matters for the CCAC's consideration or addressing the CCAC at the Public Forum is invited to submit a request and/or materials by fax to the following number: 202-756-6830. Authority: 31 U.S.C. 5135(b)(8)(C). Dated: January 23, 2006. David A. Lebryk, Acting Director, United States Mint. [FR Doc. 06-905 Filed 1-30-06; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 8

Traces to 8 documents

U.S. Code