21420 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 73 / Friday, April 15, 2011 / Notices 

procedures contained in Appendix A of 

14 CFR part 150. Such determination 

does not constitute approval of the 

airport operator’s data, information or 

plans, or a commitment to approve a 

Noise Compatibility Program or to fund 

the implementation of that Program. If 

questions arise concerning the precise 

relationship of specific properties to 

noise exposure contours depicted on a 

Noise Exposure Map submitted under 

Section 47503 of the Act, it should be 

noted that the FAA is not involved in 

any way in determining the relative 

locations of specific properties with 

regard to the depicted noise exposure 

contours, or in interpreting the Noise 

Exposure Maps to resolve questions 

concerning, for example, which 

properties should be covered by the 

provisions of Section 47506 of the Act. 

These functions are inseparable from 

the ultimate land use control and 

planning responsibilities of local 

government. These local responsibilities 

are not changed in any way under 14 

CFR part 150 or through FAA’s review 

of Noise Exposure Maps. 

Therefore, the responsibility for the 

detailed overlaying of noise exposure 

contours onto the map depicting 

properties on the surface rests 

exclusively with the airport operator 

that submitted those maps, or with 

those public agencies and planning 

agencies with which consultation is 

required under Section 47503 of the 

Act. The FAA has relied on the 

certification by the airport operator, 

under Section 150.21 of 14 CFR part 

150, that the statutorily required 

consultation has been accomplished. 

Copies of the full Noise Exposure 

Maps documentation and of the FAA’s 

evaluation of the maps are available for 

examination at the following locations: 

Federal Aviation Administration, 

Memphis Airports District Office, 

2862 Business Park Drive, Building G, 

Memphis, Tennessee 38118. 

Questions may be directed to the 

individual named above under the 

heading, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 

Issued in Memphis, Tennessee on April 7, 

2011. 

Phillip J. Braden, 

Manager, Memphis Airports District Office. 

[FR Doc. 2011–9224 Filed 4–14–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

[Docket No. FAA–2011–0361] 

Policy and Procedures Concerning the 

Use of Airport Revenue; Policy 

Regarding Airport Rates and Charges: 

Petition of the Clark County 

Department of Aviation To Use a 

Weight-Based Air Service Incentive 

Program 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of petition; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: This notice requests 

comments on a petition to accept an air 

service incentive program at McCarran 

International Airport (Airport) as 

consistent with Federal law and policies 

on the use of airport revenue and on 

airport rates and charges. The petitioner 

Clark County Department of Aviation is 

the owner and operator of the Airport. 

The petitioner is the recipient of Federal 

grants under the Airport Improvement 

Program (AIP), and is subject to 

obligations under AIP grant agreements, 

including Federal law and policy on the 

use of airport revenue and on airport 

rates and charges. The FAA has 

interpreted these policies, and the 

underlying Federal statutes, to permit a 

temporary waiver of standard airport 

fees for carriers that provide new air 

service at an airport, as an incentive to 

begin or expand air service. The agency 

recently issued the Air Carrier Incentive 

Program Guidebook to provide specific 

guidance to airport operators on the use 

of air service incentive programs. That 

guidance restates FAA’s previously 

issued opinions regarding what 

constitutes new service as characterized 

in the FAA’s Policy and Procedures 

Concerning the Use of Airport Revenue 

(Revenue Use Policy) (64 FR 7696). 

Since the inception of the Revenue Use 

Policy in 1999, the FAA has defined 

new air service as: (a) Service to an 

airport destination not currently served, 

(b) nonstop service where no nonstop 

service is currently offered, (c) new 

entrant carrier, and/or (d) increased 

frequency of flights to a specific 

destination. The FAA’s interpretation 

has not permitted an airport operator to 

offer an incentive program that provides 

discounts based on increased aircraft 

weight or an increased number of seats 

on existing flights. The petitioner 

proposes an incentive program that 

would reward air carriers for an increase 

in landed weight. An increase in landed 

weight could result from an increase in 

the size of aircraft used, or ‘‘upgauging,’’ 

on existing flights as well as from added 

flights. The petitioner requests that the 

FAA amend existing guidance to make 

clear that its proposed incentive plan is 

consistent with Federal law and general 

agency policies on the use of airport 

revenue and on airport rates and 

charges. The FAA is publishing this 

notice of the petition for public 

comment on whether agency guidance 

should be interpreted or amended as 

requested. 

DATES: Send your comments on or 

before May 31, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments 

[identified by Docket Number FAA– 

2011–0361] using any of the following 

methods: 

• Government-wide rulemaking Web 

site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov 

and follow the instructions for sending 

your comments electronically. 

• Mail: Docket Operations, U.S. 

Department of Transportation, West 

Building, Ground Floor, Room W12– 

140, Routing Symbol M–30, 1200 New 

Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 

20590. 

• Fax: 1–202–493–2251. 

• Hand Delivery: To Docket 

Operations, Room W12–140 on the 

ground floor of the West Building, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, 

DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. 

Privacy: We will post all comments 

we receive, without change, to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information you provide. For 

more information, see the Privacy Act 

discussion in the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION section of this document. 

Docket: To read background 

documents or comments received, go to 

http://www.regulations.gov at any time 

or to Room W12–140 on the ground 

floor of the West Building, 1200 New 

Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, 

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Stacy Swigart, Airport Compliance 

Division, ACO–100, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591, 

telephone (202) 267–8725; facsimile: 

(202) 267–5257; e-mail: 

Stacy.Swigart@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: An air 

service incentive program is a 

temporary reduction in the fees that an 

airport operator charges air carriers at 

the airport, or other temporary benefits 

for carriers, for the purpose of 

promoting new or additional air service. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 73 / Friday, April 15, 2011 / Notices 21421 

While incentive programs can take 

many forms, they may involve a waiver 

of fees that would otherwise be due, 

such as landing fees; cooperation and 

assistance in marketing new service; 

and a subsidy of air service if airport 

revenue is not used for that purpose. 

Because incentive fee waivers can result 

in differential fees charged to different 

air carriers for similar use of the airport, 

incentive programs can involve issues of 

compliance with Federal obligations 

regarding discriminatory treatment of 

air carriers and use of airport revenue. 

On February 14, 2011, the Federal 

Aviation Administration (FAA) received 

a letter from counsel for the Clark 

County Department of Aviation, the 

owner and operator of McCarran 

International Airport in Las Vegas, 

Nevada, requesting a determination 

from the FAA that the Department of 

Aviation’s proposed air service 

incentive program does not conflict 

with Federal obligations. As a matter of 

process, the agency has elected to treat 

the request as a petition to amend 

agency policy, and is publishing notice 

of the request for public comment before 

making a determination. However, the 

agency has made no determination on 

whether granting the Department of 

Aviation’s request would or would not 

actually require amendment of any 

existing agency policy statements. 

Background: FAA policy on use of 

airport revenue and airport rates and 

charges. 

Airport sponsors that accept grants 

under the Airport Improvement Program 

agree to a set of standard grant 

assurances, as required by 49 U.S.C. 

47107. These include an assurance that 

airport revenue will be used for the 

capital and operating costs of the airport 

or airport system, or certain other 

purposes. They also include assurances 

that fees charged air carriers will be 

reasonable, not unjustly discriminatory, 

and substantially comparable to fees 

charged other carriers making similar 

use of the airport. The FAA has issued 

comprehensive policies on each of these 

assurances. 

The Department of Transportation 

published the Policy Regarding Airport 

Rates and Charges on June 21, 1996 (61 

FR 31994). Portions of the policy were 

subsequently vacated by the United 

States Court of Appeals for the District 

of Columbia Circuit in Air Transport 

Ass’n of America v. DOT, 119 F.3d 38, 

amended by 129 F.3d 625 (DC Cir. 

1997). In July 2008, the Department 

published a notice in the Federal 

Register adopting three amendments to 

the 1996 Rates and Charges Policy (73 

FR 40430, July 14, 2008). The 

amendments are intended to provide 

greater flexibility to operators of 

congested airports to use landing fees to 

provide incentives to air carriers to use 

the airport at less congested times or to 

use alternate airports to meet regional 

air service needs. The policy as 

amended does not specifically refer to 

incentive programs or fee waivers, but 

provides in part: 

3. Aeronautical fees may not unjustly 

discriminate against aeronautical users or 

user groups. 

3.1 The airport proprietor must apply a 

consistent methodology in establishing fees 

for comparable aeronautical users of the 

airport. When the airport proprietor uses a 

cost-based methodology, aeronautical fees 

imposed on any aeronautical user or group of 

aeronautical users may not exceed the costs 

allocated to that user or user group under a 

cost allocation methodology adopted by the 

airport proprietor that is consistent with this 

guidance, unless aeronautical users 

otherwise agree. 

3.1.1 The prohibition on unjust 

discrimination does not prevent an airport 

proprietor from making reasonable 

distinctions among aeronautical users (such 

as signatory and non-signatory carriers) and 

assessing higher fees on certain categories of 

aeronautical users based on those 

distinctions (such as higher fees for nonsignatory carriers, as compared to signatory 

carriers). 

The Department of Transportation 

and the FAA published the Policy and 

Procedures for the Use of Airport 

Revenue on February 16, 1999 (64 FR 

7696). That policy, in paragraph 

VI.B.12, Prohibited Uses of Airport 

Revenue, prohibits the direct subsidy of 

air carriers with airport revenues, but 

notes: 

Prohibited direct subsidies do not include 

waivers of fees or discounted landing or 

other fees during a promotional period. Any 

fee waiver or discount must be offered to all 

users of the airport, and provided to all users 

that are willing to provide the same type and 

level of new services consistent with the 

promotional offering. [64 FR 7720] 

In September 2010, the FAA 

published the Air Carrier Incentive 

Program Guidebook: A Reference for 

Airport Sponsors. The Guidebook is 

available on the FAA Airports Web site. 

The Guidebook was issued to bring 

together in one place the principles 

behind FAA policy decisions on 

individual air carrier incentive 

programs. The Guidebook is intended to 

interpret existing policies on use of 

airport revenue and airport rates and 

charges, and not to establish new policy. 

Several statements in the Guidebook 

have possible relevance to the 

Department of Aviation’s proposed 

incentive plan. 

Specifically, for example, the 

Guidebook states that promotional 

incentives are limited to new service, 

and provides a definition of new 

service: 

FAA defines new service as (a) service to 

an airport destination not currently served, 

(b) nonstop service where no nonstop service 

is currently offered, (c) new entrant carrier, 

and/or (d) increased frequency of flights to a 

specific destination. (In the last case, the 

incentive would be available only on the 

added flights.) FAA does not recognize 

repeated seasonal service, upgrade of 

equipment type, or increased number of seats 

on existing flights as new service. 

The summary of prohibited practices 

reaffirms that incentives are not 

available for an increase in aircraft 

weight or seating not associated with an 

added flight: 

Your Incentive Program may NOT: 

• Offer incremental discounts based 

on weight for existing service 

• Offer incentives based on 

incremental weight or increased number 

of seats on existing flights. 

The Petition 

The February 14, 2011, letter from 

counsel for the Clark County 

Department of Aviation requests that 

FAA determine that the Department’s 

proposed air service incentive program 

does not conflict with Federal 

obligations, and attaches a 13-page 

memorandum in support of that request. 

The letter and memorandum are 

available for review on the FAA 

Airports Web site, as well as in the 

docket locations described under 

ADDRESSES in this document. 

In brief, the Department of Aviation 

states that the ‘‘objective of the proposed 

Incentives Program is to provide an 

incentive at the margin to promote 

additions to scheduled air service seat 

capacity.’’ The program provides, 

subject to certain terms and exceptions, 

that: 

* * * all monthly scheduled service 

landed weight, by airline, in excess of that 

operated in the same month of the prior year, 

would receive a credit of up to 100% of the 

landing fee (currently $2.26 per 1,000 pounds 

of landed weight) paid on the incremental 

landed weight. 

In addition to new flights, the credit 

would apply to existing flights for 

which an increase in aircraft size 

resulted in an increase in landing 

weight. 

Request for comments 

The FAA requests comments on 

whether the petition can be considered 

consistent with agency policy on use of 

airport revenue and airport rates and 

charges, including policy statements 

contained in the Air Carrier Incentive 

Program Guidebook, and if so, whether 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
21422 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 73 / Friday, April 15, 2011 / Notices 

the stated agency policy should be 

revised to permit the kind of air service 

incentive program proposed by the 

Clark County Department of Aviation. 

Issued in Washington, DC on April 11, 

2011. 

Randall Fiertz, 

Director, Airport Compliance and Operations. 

[FR Doc. 2011–9229 Filed 4–14–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Highway Administration 

Notice To Rescind a Notice of Intent to 

Prepare a Tiered Environmental Impact 

Statement 

AGENCY: Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice to Rescind a Notice of 

Intent to Prepare a Tiered 

Environmental Impact Statement. 

SUMMARY: The FHWA is issuing this 

notice to advise the public and other 

agencies that the Notice of Intent 

published January 16, 2009, DOCID: 

fr16ja09–155, to prepare a tiered EIS for 

the Northwest Loop in Sandoval and 

Bernalillo Counties, New Mexico, is 

being rescinded. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Greg Heitmann, Environmental 

Specialist, Federal Highway 

Administration, New Mexico Division 

Office, 4001 Office Court Drive, Suite 

801, Santa Fe, NM 87507 Telephone 

(505) 820–2027. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The scope 

of the project has been adjusted to 

include only the construction of a 2-lane 

all-weather roadway within existing 

right-of-way owned by Sandoval 

County. 

The project will begin 3.06 miles 

north of the Bernalillo County line and 

extend north for 2.12 miles to Alice 

King Way. The proposed roadway will 

consist of two 12-ft driving lanes and 

3.7-ft shoulders. The roadway will have 

a gravel surface and will be designed to 

meet a design speed of 50 miles per 

hour. Drainage improvements will be 

provided where the roadway crosses 

existing water flows. 

Pursuant to the National 

Environmental Policy Act, as amended, 

FHWA, in cooperation with the 

NMDOT, is preparing a categorical 

exclusion for the proposed 

improvements. While hard copy 

comments are preferred, comments by 

electronic mail may be sent to 

Greg.Heitmann@dot.gov. 

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 

Program Number 20.205, Highway Planning 

and Construction. The regulations 

implementing Executive Order 12372 

regarding intergovernmental consultation on 

Federal programs and activities apply to this 

program.) 

Issued on March 30, 2011. 

J. Don Martinez, 

Division Administrator, Federal Highway 

Administration, Santa Fe, New Mexico. 

[FR Doc. 2011–9124 Filed 4–14–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[U.S. DOT Docket No. NHTSA–2011–0046] 

Reports, Forms, and Record Keeping 

Requirements 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT. 

ACTION: Request for public comment on 

proposed collection of information. 

SUMMARY: Before a Federal agency can 

collect certain information from the 

public, it must receive approval from 

the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB). Under procedures established 

by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), before seeking 

OMB approval, Federal agencies must 

solicit public comment on proposed 

collections of information, including 

extensions and reinstatements of 

previously approved collections. 

This document describes an 

Information Collection Request (ICR) for 

which NHTSA intends to seek OMB 

approval. 

DATES: Comments must be submitted on 

or before June 14, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments 

to the U.S. Department of 

Transportation Dockets, 1200 New 

Jersey Ave., SE., Washington, DC 20590. 

You may also submit comments 

electronically at http:// 

www.regulations.gov. All comments 

should refer to the Docket No. NHTSA– 

2011–0046. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jessica Cicchino, PhD, Contracting 

Officer’s Technical Representative, 

Office of Behavioral Safety Research 

(NTI–131), National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey 

Ave., SE., W46–491, Washington, DC, 

20590. Dr. Cicchino’s phone number is 

202–366–2752 and her e-mail address is 

jessica.cicchino@dot.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 

before an agency submits a proposed 

collection of information to OMB for 

approval, it must publish a document in 

the Federal Register providing a 60-day 

comment period and otherwise consult 

with members of the public and affected 

agencies concerning each proposed 

collection of information. The OMB has 

promulgated regulations describing 

what must be included in such a 

document. Under OMB’s regulations (at 

5 CFR 1320.8(d)), an agency must ask 

for public comment on the following: 

(i) Whether the proposed collection of 

information is necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of the 

agency, including whether the 

information will have practical utility; 

(ii) The accuracy of the agency’s 

estimate of the burden of the proposed 

collection of information, including the 

validity of the methodology and 

assumptions used; 

(iii) How to enhance the quality, 

utility, and clarity of the information to 

be collected; and 

(iv) How to minimize the burden of 

the collection of information on those 

who are to respond, including the use 

of appropriate automated, electronic, 

mechanical, or other technological 

collection techniques or other forms of 

information technology, e.g., permitting 

electronic submission of responses. 

In compliance with these 

requirements, NHTSA asks public 

comment on the following proposed 

collection of information: 

Title: Evaluation of Impaired Riding 

Interventions. 

Type of Request: New information 

collection request. 

OMB Clearance Number: None. 

Form Number: This collection of 

information uses no standard forms. 

Requested Expiration Date of 

Approval: 3 years from date of approval. 

Summary of the Collection of 

Information: The National Highway 

Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) 

proposes to collect information from the 

public to evaluate intervention 

programs in multiple locations designed 

to reduce impaired motorcycle riding. 

NHTSA anticipates that the programs 

will take place over the 2012 riding 

season. In-person interviews will be 

conducted with motorcycle riders in up 

to 4 program sites, and in up to 2 

control sites not carrying out an 

intervention. Motorcycle riders will be 

interviewed at locations within the sites 

where riders congregate. Interview 

length will average 5 minutes and will 

collect information on attitudes, 

awareness, knowledge, and behavior 

related to the intervention. 

The interviews will follow a pre-post 

design where they are administered 

prior to the implementation of the 

intervention and after its conclusion. Up 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES