### 27537 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 91 / Thursday, May 10, 2012 / Notices

similarly affected by a proposed DOT program, policy or activity.

f. Adverse effects means the totality of significant individual or cumulative human health or environmental effects, including interrelated social and economic effects, which may include, but are not limited to: Bodily impairment, infirmity, illness or death; air, noise, and water pollution and soil contamination; destruction or disruption of man-made or natural resources; destruction or diminution of aesthetic values; destruction or disruption of community cohesion or a community’s economic vitality; destruction or disruption of the availability of public and private facilities and services; vibration; adverse employment effects; displacement of persons, businesses, farms, or nonprofit organizations; increased traffic congestion, isolation, exclusion or separation of minority or low-income individuals within a given community or from the broader community; and the denial of, reduction in, or significant delay in the receipt of, benefits of DOT programs, policies, or activities.

g. Disproportionately high and adverse effect on minority and low-income populations means an adverse effect that:

(1) Is predominately borne by a minority population and/or a low-income population,

or (2) Will be suffered by the minority population and/or low-income population and is appreciably more severe or greater in magnitude than the adverse effect that will be suffered by the non-minority population and/ or non-low-income population.

h. Programs, policies, and/or activities mean all projects, programs, policies, and activities that affect human health or the environment, and which are undertaken or approved by DOT. These include, but are not limited to, permits, licenses, and financial assistance provided by DOT. Interrelated projects within a system may be considered to be a single project, program, policy or activity for purposes of this Order.

i. Regulations and guidance means regulations, programs, policies, guidance, and procedures promulgated, issued, or approved by DOT.

Dated: May 2, 2012. Ray LaHood, Secretary of Transportation.

[FR Doc. 2012–11309 Filed 5–9–12; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–9X–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION**

**Federal Aviation Administration**

**Notice of Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) Approvals and Disapprovals** 

**AGENCY :**  Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

**ACTION :**  Monthly Notice of PFC Approvals and Disapprovals. In April 2012, there were two applications approved. This notice also includes information on one application, approved in March 2012, inadvertently left off the March 2012 notice. Additionally, two approved amendments to previously approved applications are listed.

**SUMMARY :**  The FAA publishes a monthly notice, as appropriate, of PFC approvals and disapprovals under the provisions of the Aviation Safety and Capacity Expansion Act of 1990 (Title IX of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990) (Pub. L. 101–508) and Part 158 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR Part 158). This notice is published pursuant to paragraph d of § 158.29.
PFC Applications Approved

Public Agency: Tri-Cities Airport Commission, Blountsville, Tennessee.

Application Number: 12–04–C–00– TRI.

Application Type: Impose and use a PFC.

PFC Level: $4.50. Total PFC Revenue Approved in This Decision: $489,869.

Earliest Charge Effective Date: June 1,
2014.

Estimated Charge Expiration Date: January 1, 2015.

Class of Air Carriers Not Required to Collect PFC’s: Nonscheduled/ondemand air carriers filing FAA Form

1800–31.

Determination: Approved. Based on information submitted in the public agency’s application, the FAA has determined that the proposed class accounts for less than 1 percent of the total annual enplanements at Tri-Cities Regional Airport.

Brief Description of Projects Approved for Collection and Use: Taxiway R extension and road relocation—design.

Runway 5/23 pavement rehabilitation—design.

Property acquisition—parcel 40. In-line baggage system. Runway high speed snow removal broom.

Taxiway R extension and road relocation—construction.

PFC administrative costs. Decision Date: March 27, 2012. For Further Information Contact: Cynthia Wills, Memphis Airports District Office, (901) 322–8190.

Public Agency: Great Falls International Airport Authority, Great Falls, Montana. Application Number: 12–04–C–00– GTF.

Application Type: Impose and use a PFC.

PFC Level: $4.50. Total PFC Revenue Approved in This Decision: $4,040,904.

Earliest Charge Effective Date: November 1, 2016.

Estimated Charge Expiration Date: June 1, 2021.

Class of Air Carriers Not Required to Collect PFC’S: Air taxi/commercial operators filing FM Form 1800–31.

Determination: Approved. Based on information submitted in the public agency’s application, the FAA has determined that the proposed class accounts for less than 1 percent of the total annual enplanements at Great Falls International Airport.

Brief Description of Projects Approved for Collection and Use: Correct runway 3/21 line of sight deficiency.

Install category III instrument landing system.

2005 purchase of airport power

sweeper.

Terminal rehabilitation, phase I. Purchase airport snow removal truck/ plow.

Design and construct noise mitigation measures for residences.

Decision Date: April 12, 2012. For Further Information Contact: Jason Garwood, Helena Airports District Office, (406) 449–5078.

Public Agency: Port of Pasco, Pasco, Washington.

Application Number: 12–08–C–00– PSC.

Application Type: Impose and use a PFC.

PFC Level: $4.50. Total PFC Revenue Approved in This Decision: $3,865,000.

Earliest Charge Effective Date: May 1,
2015.

Estimated Charge Expiration Date: April 1, 2022.

Class of Air Carriers Not Required to Collect PFC’s: None.

Brief Description of Projects Approved for Collection and Use: Terminal area plan. Terminal building rehabilitation. Runway sweeper acquisition. PFC administration.
Decision Date: April 12, 2012. For Further Information Contact: Trang Tran, Seattle Airports District Office, (425) 227–1662.


### 27538 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 91 / Thursday, May 10, 2012 / Notices

1 FAA, Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC)—New Task (76 FR 21936).



### AMENDMENTS TO 

### PFC APPROVALS

Amendment No. city, State Amendment approved date Original approved net PFC revenue Amended approved net PFC revenue Original estimated

charge exp. date Amended estimated

charge exp. date

11–11–C–01–RNO Reno, NV .............................................. 04/03/12 $25,491,376 $33,933,876 04/01/17 07/01/18 07–02–C–01–CLT ................................................................ 04/11/12 144,557,137 143,057,137 12/01/18 12/01/1 8

Issued in Washington, DC, on May 3, 2012. Joe Hebert, Manager, Financial Analysis and Passenger Facility Charge Branch.

[FR Doc. 2012–11231 Filed 5–9–12; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–M**

**DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION**

**Federal Aviation Administration**

**Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee—Continuing a Task** 

**AGENCY :**  Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

**ACTION :**  Notice of continuing a task assignment for the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC).

**SUMMARY :**  The FAA assigned the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC) a continuing task to provide advice and recommendations to the FAA about implementing a process for prioritizing rulemaking projects. This task addresses, in part, one of the Department of Transportation’s Future of Aviation Advisory Committee (FAAC) recommendations. This notice informs the public of a continuing ARAC activity and does not solicit membership for the existing Rulemaking Prioritization Working Group (RPWG).

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Katherine Haley, Office of Rulemaking, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone: 202– 493–5708, facsimile: 202–267–5075; email: Katherine.L.Haley@faa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  Background

The FAA established ARAC to provide advice and recommendations to the FAA Administrator on the FAA’s rulemaking activities. ARAC’s objectives are to improve the development of the FAA’s regulations by providing information, advice, and recommendations related to aviation issues.

In April 2011, the FAA tasked ARAC to provide advice and recommendations on developing a framework and methodologies to assist the FAA in assessing and sequencing potential rulemaking projects. 1 The FAA provided the RPWG with a set of issues to test the framework and methodologies. The RPWG conducted its task from June to December 2011 and submitted recommendations to ARAC on December 14, 2011. ARAC accepted the recommendations on December 16, 2011 and forwarded them to the FAA. The entire recommendation report can be found at: http://www.faa.gov/ regulations

_ policies/rulemaking/ committees/arac/.

The March 2012 ARAC Executive Committee meeting included a discussion of continuing the task to further test the RPWG’s methodology. This notice advises the public that the FAA has assigned, and the ARAC Executive Committee has accepted, the task to test the methodology and to develop a report including recommendations explaining the results.

The Task

The FAA has tasked the RPWG to provide advice and recommendations to further test the recommended methodology.

The RPWG is expected to develop a report containing recommended changes to the methodology. This report should document both majority and minority positions on the findings and the rationale for each position. Any disagreements should be documented, including the rationale for each position and the reasons for the disagreement.

In developing its recommendations, the RPWG shall:

1. Review the RPWG Phase I Recommendation Report.

2. Test the methodology and the tools using a subset of completed rulemakings provided by the FAA.

3. Develop measurable scoring evaluation to evaluate projects against each other.

4. Evaluate the results of the test and refine the process and the tools accordingly.

Schedule: The recommendations must be forwarded to the ARAC Executive Committee for review and approval no later than September 2012. The RPWG may be asked to clarify the report between September and December 2012. ARAC Acceptance of Task

The ARAC Executive Committee has accepted the continuing task using members of the existing RPWG. The RPWG serves as staff to ARAC and assists in the analysis of the assigned task. ARAC must review and approve the RPWG’s recommendations. If ARAC accepts the working group’s recommendations, it will send them to the FAA. Working Group Activity

The RPWG must comply with the procedures adopted by ARAC. As part of the procedures, the RPWG must:

1. Recommend a work plan for completion of the task, including the rationale supporting such a plan, for consideration at the next ARAC Executive Committee meeting held following publication of this notice.

2. Provide a status report at each meeting of the ARAC Executive Committee.

3. Draft the recommendation report and required analyses and/or any other related materials or documents.

4. Present the final recommendations to the ARAC Executive Committee for review and approval. Participation in the Working Group

The existing RPWG is comprised of technical experts having an interest in the assigned task. A working group member need not be a representative or a member of the full committee.

All existing RPWG members who choose to participate in this task must actively participate by attending all meetings, and providing written comments when requested to do so. Each member must devote the resources necessary to support the working group in meeting any assigned deadlines. Each member must keep their management chain, and those they may represent, advised of working group activities and decisions to ensure the proposed technical solutions do not conflict with their sponsoring organization’s position when the subject is presented to ARAC for approval. Once the RPWG has begun deliberations, members will not be added or substituted without the