60698 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 12, 2004 / Notices 

Docket No.: FAA–2003–14204. 

Petitioner: Abilene Aero, Inc. 

Section of 14 CFR Affected: 14 CFR 

135.143(c)(2). 

Description of Relief Sought/

Disposition: To permit Abilene Aero, 

Inc., to operate certain aircraft under 

part 135 without a TSO-C112 (Mode S) 

transponder installed on those aircraft. 

Grant, 9/17/2004, Exemption No. 7948B.

Docket No.: FAA–2000–8338. 

Petitioner: Tatonduk Outfitters 

Limited d.b.a. Everts Air Alaska. 

Section of 14 CFR Affected: 14 CFR 

135.143(c)(2). 

Description of Relief Sought/

Disposition: To permit Tatonduk 

Outfitters Limited d.b.a. Everts Air 

Alaska to operate certain aircraft under 

part 135 without a TSO-C112 (Mode S) 

transponder installed on those aircraft. 

Grant, 9/16/2004, Exemption No. 

7403C.

Docket No.: FAA–2003–14279. 

Petitioner: South Aero, Inc. 

Section of 14 CFR Affected: 14 CFR 

135.143(c)(2). 

Description of Relief Sought/

Disposition: To permit South Aero, Inc., 

to operate certain aircraft under part 135 

without a TSO-C112 (Mode S) 

transponder installed on those aircraft. 

Grant, 09/16/2004, Exemption No. 

7985A.

Docket No.: FAA–2002–12484. 

Petitioner: Dynamic Aviation. 

Section of 14 CFR Affected: 14 CFR 

137.53(c)(2). 

Description of Relief Sought/

Disposition: To permit Dynamic 

Aviation an amendment to Exemption 

No. 7827C that will allow Dynamic 

Aviation pilots to operate additional 

aircraft. Grant, 9/15/2004, Exemption 

No. 7827D.

Docket No.: FAA–2001–11090. 

Petitioner: Army Aviation Heritage 

Foundation. 

Section of 14 CFR Affected: 14 CFR 

91.319, 119.5(g), and 119.25. 

Description of Relief Sought/

Disposition: To permit an extension of 

Exemption No. 7736 to the Army 

Aviation Heritage Foundation (AAHF), 

which will allow them to operate its 

former military UH–1H helicopter for 

the purpose of carrying passengers on 

local educational flights, subject to 

revised conditions and limitations. 

Grant, 9/16/2004, Exemption No. 

7736C.

Docket No.: FAA–2004–19071. 

Petitioner: Mr. Daryl Baker. 

Section of 14 CFR Affected: 14 CFR 

135.251, 135.255, and 135.353, and 

appendices I and J to part 121. 

Description of Relief Sought/

Disposition: To permit Mr. Daryl Baker 

to conduct local sightseeing flights at 

the Windham Airport, Willimantic, 

Connecticut, between September 25, 

and October 10, 2004, for compensation 

or hire, without complying with certain 

anti-drug and alcohol misuse prevention 

requirements of part 135, subject to 

certain conditions and limitations. 

Grant, 9/20/2004, Exemption No. 8407.

Docket No.: FAA–2004–19006. 

Petitioner: Traffic Management 

Corporation. 

Section of 14 CFR Affected: 14 CFR 

125.224. 

Description of Relief Sought/

Disposition: To permit Traffic 

Management Corporation to operate two 

leased L–188 Electra aircraft without a 

Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance 

System II and the appropriate Mode S 

transponder for a period of 1-year, 

because of economic hardship endured 

since the terrorist attack of September 

11, 2001. Denial, 9/16/2004, Exemption 

No. 8408.

Docket No.: FAA–2004–19004. 

Petitioner: Zantop International 

Airlines, Inc. 

Section of 14 CFR Affected: 14 CFR 

121.356. 

Description of Relief Sought/

Disposition: To permit Zantop 

International Airlines, Inc., to operate 

certain aircraft without a Traffic Alert 

and Collision Avoidance System II and 

the appropriate Mode S transponder for 

a period of 1-year, because of economic 

hardship endured since the terrorist 

attack of September 11, 2001. Denial, 9/

16/2004, Exemption No. 8409.

Docket No.: FAA–2000–8100. 

Petitioner: Northwest Airlines, Inc. 

Section of 14 CFR Affected: 14 CFR 

121.440(a) and SFAR 68, section 

6(b)(3)(ii)(A). 

Description of Relief Sought/

Disposition: To permit Northwest 

Airlines, Inc., an amendment to 

Exemption No. 5815, that will enable 

them to meet line check requirements 

using an alternative line check program, 

subject to revised conditions and 

limitations. Grant, 9/16/2004, 

Exemption No. 5815F.

[FR Doc. 04–22853 Filed 10–8–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration 

[FRA Emergency Order No. 18, Notice No. 

2] 

Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway 

Company; Notice Rescinding FRA 

Emergency Order 18, Requiring the 

Capability To Initiate Emergency 

Application of Air Brakes From the 

Head End and Rear of Trains, After a 

60-day Interim Transition Period 

The Federal Railroad Administration 

(FRA) of the United States Department 

of Transportation (DOT) has determined 

that, absent further notice, FRA will 

consider the emergency situation 

requiring the issuance of Emergency 

Order 18 to have abated at the 

conclusion of a 60-day interim 

transition period during which the 

Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway 

Company (BNSF) will comply with a 

series of modified operational 

requirements before beginning full 

operation under the existing Federal 

regulations related to end-of-train (EOT) 

devices. Emergency Order 18 requires 

that all westward trains operated by the 

BNSF on the Cajon Subdivision, 

between Barstow milepost 745.9 and 

Baseline milepost 79.9, have the 

capability to initiate an emergency 

application of the air brakes from both 

the head and rear of the train and 

imposes certain inspection, testing, and 

operational requirements on the 

railroad. 

Authority 

Authority to enforce Federal railroad 

safety laws has been delegated by the 

Secretary of Transportation to the 

Federal Railroad Administrator. 49 CFR 

1.49. Railroads are subject to FRA’s 

safety jurisdiction under the Federal 

railroad safety laws. 49 U.S.C. 20101, 

20103. FRA is authorized to issue 

emergency orders where an unsafe 

condition or practice ‘‘causes an 

emergency situation involving a hazard 

of death or personal injury.’’ 49 U.S.C. 

20104. These orders may immediately 

impose such ‘‘restrictions and 

prohibitions * * * that may be 

necessary to abate the situation.’’ (Ibid.) 

Background 

BNSF’s line of railroad between 

Barstow and Los Angeles, California, 

consists of double main track which 

passes through the San Bernardino 

Mountains via ‘‘Cajon Pass.’’ The route 

for westward moving trains involves a 

steady climb from Barstow to Summit, 

California, a distance of approximately 

55 miles. At Summit, the line begins a 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 12, 2004 / Notices 60699

descent westward with a more than 3 

percent grade on one track and a more 

than 2 percent grade on the other track. 

Emergency Order 18 was issued on 

February 1, 1996, following two 

significant incidents in 1994 and 1996 

on Cajon Pass resulting from an inability 

to control train speed following 

incomplete braking in the train. See 61 

FR 5058 (February 9, 1996). Emergency 

Order 18 requires that all westward 

trains operated by the BNSF on the 

Cajon Subdivision, between Barstow 

milepost 745.9 and Baseline milepost 

79.9, have the capability to initiate an 

emergency application of the air brakes 

from both the head and rear of the train. 

The Emergency Order set out a variety 

of ways in which the railroad could 

accomplish this task and imposes 

certain inspection and testing 

requirements for trains utilizing twoway EOT devices. See 61 FR 5059–60. 

BNSF has operated under the provisions 

of Emergency Order 18 for over eight 

years without any significant noncompliance.

Subsequent to the issuance of 

Emergency Order 18, FRA issued 

regulations that directly addressed the 

inspection, testing, design, and 

operation of two-way EOT devices. See

62 FR 294 (January 2, 1997). These 

regulations are now found in subpart E 

of the Brake System Safety Standards for 

Freight and other Non-Passenger Trans 

and Equipment contained at 49 CFR 

part 232. Other than the area covered by 

Emergency Order 18, the rest of the 

United States has effectively and safely 

operated under the requirements 

contained in these Federal regulations. 

In June of 2003, after seven years of 

compliant operation under Emergency 

Order 18, BNSF requested relief from 

the requirements of the Emergency 

Order. The railroad conducted a 

meeting involving representatives of 

railroad employees and FRA in 

Redlands, California on January 15, 

2004, to discuss rescission of the Order 

and to gather suggestions for potential 

post-relief operating procedures. (The 

California Public Utilities Commission 

was also invited to the meeting.) 

On July 30, 2004, FRA’s Acting 

Associate Administrator for Safety 

provided some temporary relief from the 

provisions of Emergency Order 18 to 

allow the required inspections and tests 

to be conducted at locations other than 

at Barstow, California, while FRA 

continued to assess the continued 

necessity of the Emergency Order. 

On September 23, 2004, BNSF filed a 

supplemental petition with FRA again 

seeking rescission of Emergency Order 

18. BNSF asserts that an ‘‘emergency 

situation’’ within the meaning of 49 

U.S.C. 20104 no longer exists at Cajon 

Pass. BNSF also identifies three primary 

reasons for FRA to rescind the 

Emergency Order 18. First, BNSF 

contends that it has met the requisite 

grounds for relief by continuously 

operating in compliance with the Order 

for a period of 180 consecutive days. 

Second, BNSF states that the issuance of 

the Federal regulations regarding twoway EOT devices ensures the safety of 

train operations over the Cajon Pass 

because BNSF operations on every other 

mountain grade territory over which it 

operates have safely and effectively 

utilized those regulations. Finally, 

BNSF asserts that the measures it 

voluntarily employs for operating trains 

through Cajon Pass further enhance the 

safety of such train movements. 

Finding and Order 

Based on the years that BNSF has 

operated pursuant to the requirements 

of Emergency Order 18 without any 

significant non-compliance, the 

occurrence of no significant train 

accident or injury related to the 

operation of trains over Cajon Pass 

during that time, and the existence of 

Federal regulations directly addressing 

the inspection, testing, and maintenance 

of two-way EOT devices that are 

effectively utilized throughout the rest 

of the country, FRA concludes that 

BNSF has made a prima facie case for 

rescission of Emergency Order 18. 

However, due to the length of time 

BNSF has operated under Emergency 

Order 18, FRA believes it is prudent to 

have a short interim transition period of 

60 days before complete rescission of 

the Order occurs and operation solely 

under the existing Federal regulation 

begins. During this interim 60-day 

period the original requirements of 

Emergency Order 18 will be rescinded 

and be replaced by interim requirements 

in order to allow the railroad to 

transition its operations through Cajon 

Pass to be consistent with existing 

Federal regulations. FRA considered the 

information and views provided by 

BNSF when developing the interim 

requirements. This short interim 

transition period will allow both FRA 

and the railroad to monitor the 

operations through Cajon pass during 

that period to ensure that any personnel 

and operating issues that may arise in 

the transition are adequately and safely 

addressed. Accordingly, pursuant to the 

authority of 49 U.S.C. 20104, delegated 

to me by the Secretary of Transportation 

(49 CFR 1.49), it is hereby ordered that: 

(1) As of October 9, 2004, the 

inspection, testing, and operating 

requirements mandated in Emergency 

Order 18, Notice 1, issued on February 

1, 1996, are rescinded. Instead, starting 

on that same date, BNSF must ensure 

that all westward operating trains 

between Barstow milepost 745.9 and 

Baseline milepost 79.9 have the 

capability to effectuate an emergency 

brake application of the air brakes from 

both the head and rear of the train in 

accordance with 49 CFR part 232, 

subpart E—End-of-Train Devices, and 

abide by the additional requirements 

stated in paragraph (2), below. 

(2) Beginning on October 9, 2004, and 

continuing for a period of 60 days, 

BNSF shall comply with the following 

inspection, testing, and operational 

requirements, except when the train is 

operated in accordance with paragraphs 

1(B), 1(C), or 1(D) of the Order in effect 

prior to the issuance of this notice: 

(A) All westward train movements 

over the Needles Subdivision that are 

intended to continue between Summit 

milepost 55 and Baseline milepost 79.9 

shall include an emergency brake test at 

some location between Needles and 

Summit, California. For purposes of this 

notice, an emergency brake test means 

a test to determine that an emergency 

brake application can be initiated from 

the rear of the train and that it 

propagates throughout the entire train. 

The test may be activated by using the 

head-end device and determining that 

the brake pipe pressure drops to zero, 

and it is not necessary to place an 

employee at the rear of the train to 

conduct this test. 

(B) All westward train movements 

over the Mojave Subdivision that are 

intended to continue between Summit 

milepost 55 and Baseline milepost 79.9 

shall include an emergency brake test at 

some location between Hinkley and 

Summit, California. 

(C) BNSF shall maintain a written 

record in the cab of the lead-locomotive 

for each emergency brake test performed 

under paragraphs (2)(A) and (B) of this 

Order if the emergency brake test was 

performed by a crew other than the crew 

responsible for the train during its 

descent over the Cajon Pass. 

(D) Any westward train operating 

with a non-turbine EOT device between 

Summit milepost 55 and Baseline 

milepost 79.9 shall be equipped with 

batteries that are sufficiently charged at 

the time of installation to ensure that 

the EOT device remains operative until 

the train reaches destination as required 

in 49 CFR 232.407(f)(2). In addition, the 

following requirements shall also apply: 

(i) BNSF shall comply with all 

applicable provisions of its Air Brake 

and Train Handling Rules that require 

EOT Device batteries to be tested every 

60 days to ensure that they can be 

adequately charged;

60700 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 12, 2004 / Notices 

(ii) If a ‘‘low battery’’ indication is 

displayed during any westward train 

movement from Barstow through 

Summit, California, BNSF shall bring 

the train to a stop prior to departing 

Summit, California and change the 

battery. 

(iii) If a ‘‘low battery’’ indication is 

displayed during any westward train 

movement at or from Summit through 

Baseline, California, BNSF shall 

immediately bring the train safely to a 

stop in accordance with the railroad’s 

operating rules and change the battery. 

(iv) BNSF shall maintain a written or 

electronic record of each battery change 

made pursuant to paragraph (2)(D)(ii) of 

this Order. 

(3) The inspection, testing, and 

operational requirements contained in 

paragraph (2) of this Order will 

terminate, and this Order will no longer 

be in effect, on December 8, 2004 unless 

FRA finds a pattern of non-compliance 

by BNSF with either the provisions of 

this Order or of 49 CFR part 232, 

subpart E and issues a subsequent 

notice containing a finding that the 

emergency situation still exists and 

imposing any necessary requirements. 

Any such finding will be provided to 

the railroad in writing from FRA’s 

Associate Administrator for Safety 

before any extension in the above-noted 

date is effectuated. After December 8, 

2004, BNSF operations subject to this 

Order shall comply with all applicable 

portions of 49 CFR part 232, subpart E. 

If during the period covered by this 

notice, FRA determines that an 

emergency situation exists, as the term 

is used in 49 U.S.C. 20104, FRA reserves 

the right to issue an emergency order to 

address the situation if necessary. 

Relief 

Emergency Order 18 will be rescinded 

in accordance with the dates and 

procedures identified in paragraphs (1) 

and (3) of the Finding and Order section 

of this notice. FRA will, at any time, 

consider requests by BNSF to exclude 

certain train operations from the scope 

of this order based on satisfactory 

demonstration that those operations can 

be safely performed using other 

procedures. However, all aspects of this 

order apply to all westward trains 

departing Barstow unless and until 

written special approval is granted 

permitting other procedures for specific 

train operations. The Associate 

Administrator for Safety is authorized to 

issue such special approvals without 

amending this order. 

Penalties 

Any violation of this order shall 

subject the person committing the 

violation to a civil penalty of up to 

$20,000. 49 U.S.C. 21301. FRA may, 

through the Attorney General, also seek 

injunctive relief to enforce this order. 49 

U.S.C. 20112. 

Effective Date and Notice to Affected 

Persons 

This order shall take effect at 12:01 

a.m (P.s.t.) on October 8, 2004, and 

apply to all westward trains operating 

between Barstow milepost 745.9 and 

Baseline milepost 79.9. Notice of this 

Order will be provided by publishing it 

in the Federal Register. Copies of this 

Emergency Order will be sent by mail or 

facsimile prior to publication to the Vice 

President-Operations of BNSF, counsel 

for BNSF, officials of interested labor 

organizations, the California PUC, and 

the Association of American Railroads. 

Review 

Opportunity for formal review of this 

Emergency Order notice and the new 

requirements imposed herein will be 

provided in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 

20104(b) and section 554 of Title 5 of 

the United States Code. Administrative 

procedures governing such review are 

found at 49 CFR part 211. See 49 CFR 

211.47, 211.71, 211.73, 211.75, and 

211.77.

Issued in Washington, DC on October 6, 

2004. 

Betty Monro, 

Acting Administrator.

[FR Doc. 04–22941 Filed 10–8–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–06–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. NHTSA 2004–18745] 

Grant of Applications of Three 

Motorcycle Manufacturers for 

Temporary Exemptions and Renewal 

of Temporary Exemptions From 

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 

No. 123

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.

ACTION: Grant of applications for 

temporary exemptions and renewals of 

temporary exemptions from a Federal 

motor vehicle safety standard. 

SUMMARY: This notice grants the 

applications by three motorcycle 

manufacturers (Honda, Piaggio, and 

Yamaha) for temporary exemptions, and 

renewal of temporary exemptions, from 

a provision in the Federal motor vehicle 

safety standard on motorcycle controls 

and displays specifying that a 

motorcycle rear brake, if provided, must 

be controlled by a right foot control. We 

are permitting each manufacturer to use 

the left handlebar as an alternative 

location for the rear brake control. Each 

applicant has asserted that ‘‘compliance 

with the standard would prevent the 

manufacturer from selling a motor 

vehicle with an overall level of safety at 

least equal to the overall safety level of 

nonexempt vehicles.’’

DATES: The grant of each application for 

temporary exemption expires September 

1, 2007.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

non-legal issues, you may contact Mr. 

Michael Pyne, Office of Crash 

Avoidance Standards at (202) 366–4171. 

His FAX number is: (202) 493–2739. 

For legal issues, you may contact Ms. 

Dorothy Nakama, Office of the Chief 

Counsel at (202) 366–2992. Her FAX 

number is: (202) 366–3820. 

You may send mail to these officials 

at: National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration, 400 Seventh St., SW., 

Washington, DC 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

49 U.S.C. 30113(b) provides the 

Secretary of Transportation the 

authority to exempt, on a temporary 

basis, motor vehicles from a motor 

vehicle safety standard under certain 

circumstances. The exemption may be 

renewed, if the vehicle manufacturer 

reapplies. The Secretary has delegated 

the authority for section 30113(b) to 

NHTSA. 

NHTSA has established regulations at 

49 CFR part 555, Temporary Exemption 

from Motor Vehicle Safety and Bumper 

Standards. Part 555 provides a means 

by which motor vehicle manufacturers 

may apply for temporary exemptions 

from the Federal motor vehicle safety 

standards on the basis of substantial 

economic hardship, facilitation of the 

development of new motor vehicle 

safety or low-emission engine features, 

or existence of an equivalent overall 

level of motor vehicle safety. 

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety 

Standard (FMVSS) No. 123, Motorcycle 

controls and displays (49 CFR 571.123) 

specifies requirements for the location, 

operation, identification, and 

illumination of motorcycle controls and 

displays, and requirements for 

motorcycle stands and footrests. Among 

other requirements, FMVSS No. 123 

specifies that for motorcycles with rear 

wheel brakes, the rear wheel brakes 

must be operable through the right foot 

control, although the left handlebar is 

permissible for motor-driven cycles (See

S5.2.1, and Table 1, Item 11). MotorVerDate jul<14>2003 20:38 Oct 08, 2004 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00093 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\12OCN1.SGM 12OCN1