49290 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 182 / Friday, September 19, 1997 / Notices

section 158.25 of Part 158. The FAA

will approve or disapprove the

application, in whole or part, no later

than November 19, 1997.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before October 20, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Comments on this

application may be mailed or delivered

in triplicate to the FAA at the following

address: Airports Division, 15000

Aviation Blvd., Lawndale, CA 90261. In

addition, one copy of any comments

submitted to the FAA must be mailed or

delivered to Mr. Neilson A. Bertholf, Jr.,

Aviation Director, City of Phoenix, 3400

Sky Harbor Blvd., Phoenix, AZ 85034–

4420. Air carriers and foreign air

carriers may submit copies of written

comments previously provided to the

city of Phoenix under section 158.23 of

Part 158.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. John P. Milligan, Supervisor

Standards Section, Airports Division,

15000 Aviation Blvd., Lawndale, CA

90261, Telephone (310) 725–3621. The

application may be reviewed in person

at this same location.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA

proposes to rule and invites public

comment on the application to use the

revenue from a PFC at Phoenix Sky

Harbor International Airport 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).

On August 20, 1997, the FAA

determined that the application to use

the revenue from a PFC submitted by

the city of Phoenix was substantially

complete within the requirements of

section 158.25 of Part 158. The FAA

will approve or disapprove the

application, in whole or in part, no later

than November 19, 1997.

The following is a brief overview of

application No. AWP–97–04–U–00–

PHX:

Level of the PFC: $3.00.

Actual Charge Effective Date: April 1,

1996.

Estimated Charge Expiration Date:

July 31, 1998.

Total Approved Net PFC Revenue:

$1,875,000.

Brief description of the project:

Extend North Runway, West Class and

classes of air carriers which the public

agency has requested not be required to

collect PFCs: ATCO Taxi/Commercial

Operators; CAC, Commuters or Small

Certificated Air Carriers with less than

7,500 enplanements each annually;

CRAC, Large Certificated Route Air

Carriers providing non-scheduled

service with less than 7,500

enplanements each annually.

Any person may inspect the

application in person at the FAA office

listed above under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. In addition, any

person may, upon request, inspect the

application, notice and other documents

germane to the application, in person at

the city of Phoenix Aviation

Department.

Issued in Hawthorne, California, on

September 3, 1997.

Herman C. Bliss,

Manager, Airports Division, Western-Pacific

Region.

[FR Doc. 97–24995 Filed 9–18–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Intent To Rule on Application

To Impose and Use the Revenue From

a Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) at

the Tucson International Airport,

Tucson, AZ

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Intent to Rule on

Application.

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to rule and

invites public comment on the

application to impose and use the

revenue from a PFC at the Tucson

International Airport 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 Regulation (14 CFR part 158).

On August 20, 1997, the FAA

determined that the application to

impose and use the revenue from a PFC

submitted by the Tucson Airport

Authority was substantially complete

within the requirements of § 158.25 of

part 158. The FAA will approve or

disapprove the application, in whole or

in part, no later than November 19,

1997.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before October 20, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Comments on this

application may be mailed or delivered

in triplicate to the FAA at the following

address: Airports Division, P.O. Box

92007, Worldway Postal Center, Los

Angeles, CA 90009. In addition, one

copy of any comments submitted to the

FAA must be mailed or delivered to Mr.

Walter A. Burg, Chief Executive Officer,

Tucson Airport Authority, 7005 South

Plumer Ave., Tucson, AZ 85706. Air

carriers and foreign air carriers may

submit copies of written comments

previously provided to the Tucscon

Airport Authority under § 158.23 of

FAR Part 158.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

John P. Milligan, Supervisor Standards

Section, Airports Division, P.O. Box

92007, WPC, Los Angeles, CA 90009,

Telephone: (310) 725–3621. The

application may be reviewed in person

at this same location.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA

proposes to rule and invites public

comment on the application to impose

and use the revenue from a PFC at the

Tucson International Airport 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).

On August 20, 1997, the FAA

determined that the application to

impose and use the revenue from a PFC

submitted by the Tucson Airport

Authority was substantially complete

within the requirements of section

158.25 of Part 158. The FAA will

approve or disapprove the application,

in whole or in Part, no later than

November 19, 1997.

The following is a brief overview of

the impose and use application No.

AWP–97–01–C–00–TUS:

Level of the Proposed PFC:: $3.00

Proposed Charge Effective Date:

February 1, 1998

Proposed Charge Expiration Date:

November 30, 2002

Total Estimated PFC Revenue:

$26,717,799.00

Brief description of the proposed

impose & use projects:

Remodel Baggage Claim Area

Land Acquisition Expansion

Land Acquisition Noise

Land Acquisition (Section 27 & 33)

(Reimbursement)

Terminal Entrance Improvements

(Reimbursement)

Class or classes of air carriers which

the public agency has requested not be

required to collect PFCs: Unscheduled

Part 135 Air Taxi Operators.

Any person may inspect the

application in person at the FAA office

listed above under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. In addition, any

person may, upon request, inspect the

application, notice and other documents

germane to the application, in person at

the Tucson Airport Authority.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 182 / Friday, September 19, 1997 / Notices 49291

Issued in Hawthorne, California, on August

27, 1997.

Herman C. Bliss,

Manager, Airports Division, Western-Pacific

Region.

[FR Doc. 97–24852 Filed 9–18–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Highway Administration

Environmental Impact Statement: Cape

Girardeau County, MO

AGENCY: Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Intent.

SUMMARY: The FHWA is issuing this

notice to advise the public that an

environmental impact statement will be

prepared for proposed improvements to

the transportation system in Cape

Girardeau County, Missouri.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Donald Neumann, Programs Engineer,

FHWA Division Office, P.O. Box 1787,

Jefferson City, MO 65102, Telephone:

(573) 636–7104 or Scott Meyer, District

Engineer, Missouri Department of

Transportation, P.O. Box 160, Sikeston,

MO 63801, Telephone: (573) 472–5333.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

FHWA, in cooperation with the

Missouri Department of Transportation

(MoDOT), will prepare an

environmental impact statement (EIS)

for a proposed project to improve the

transportation system in the vicinity of

Missouri Routes 34 and 72 in Cape

Girardeau County, Missouri.

Improvements to the corridor are

considered necessary to provide for a

safe and efficient transportation

network. Alternatives under

consideration include (1) taking no

action; (2) using alternate travel modes;

(3) upgrading and improving the

existing roadways; and (4) constructing

a four-lane roadway on new or partiallynew location. Design variations of grade

and alignment will be incorporated into

and studied with the various build

alternatives. The proposed action will

likely include transportation

improvements from the intersection of

Missouri Routes 34 and 72, west of

Jackson, Missouri, to the Missouri Route

K interchange with Interstate 55 in Cape

Girardeau, Missouri.

The scoping process will involve all

appropriate federal, state, and local

agencies, and private organizations and

citizens who have previously expressed

or are known to have interest in this

proposal. A series of public meetings

will be held to engage the regional

community in the decision making

process, and to obtain public comment.

Public meetings are tentatively

scheduled for fall, 1997 and for spring,

1998. In addition, a public hearing will

be held to present the findings of the

draft EIS (DEIS). Public notice will be

given of the time and place of the

meetings and hearing. The DEIS will be

available for public and agency review

and comment prior to the public

hearing.

To ensure that the full range of issues

related to this proposed action are

addressed and all significant issues

identified, comments and suggestions

are invited from all interested parties.

Comments or questions concerning this

proposed action and the EIS should be

directed to the FHWA or MoDOT at the

addresses provided above.

(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: September 9, 1997.

Donald Neumann,

Programs Engineer, Jefferson City.

[FR Doc. 97–24891 Filed 9–18–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–22–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

Petitions for Waivers of Compliance

In accordance with Part 211 of Title

49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR),

notice is hereby given that the Federal

Railroad Administration (FRA) received

requests for waivers of compliance with

certain requirements of its safety

standards. The individual petitions are

described below, including the parties

seeking relief, the regulatory provisions

involved, the nature of the relief being

requested, and the petitioners’

arguments in favor of relief.

The Bay Line Railroad, L.L.C.

(Waiver Petition Docket Number PB–97–2)

The Bay Line Railroad, L.L.C., seeks a

permanent waiver of compliance from

certain provisions of the Railroad Power

Brakes and Drawbars regulations, 49

CFR part 232, Section 23, concerning

the requirements of two-way end-oftrain (EOT) devices. Specifically, the

Bay Line Railroad seeks relief from

requiring two-way EOT devices on any

of its road trains.

The Bay Line Railroad operates only

one road train daily, Sunday through

Thursday. There are no trains on Friday

or Saturday. The road train makes the

scheduled round trip of 162 miles from

Panama City, Florida, to Dothan,

Alabama, using one train crew within

an eight hour tour of duty. The

maximum allowable speed for the train

is 40 mph. The Bay Line Railroad

reports that the average tonnage of the

southbound train is 9,000 tons, and the

northbound train averages 4,400 tons.

The ruling grade on the railroad’s main

line is 0.833 percent, with the average

grade over the entire line of 0.28

percent. The Bay Line Railroad has

three one-way EOT’s and would

continue to use them on all road trains.

The Bay Line Railroad states that it has

not had a train accident in twenty years

and has not had a loss time injury in the

Operating Department in over seven

years. The Bay Line Railroad also

declares that there has not been a

runaway train or crimped train line

incident in the history of the railroad,

and reasons that the type of accident

which would require a two-way EOT

device to apply the brakes from the rear

of the train has never occurred and

probably would never occur on the Bay

Line Railroad. The Bay Line Railroad

believes that reducing its track speed to

30 mph would reduce service to its

customers and connecting railroads

with no increase in safety.

CSX Transportation, Incorporated

(Waiver Petition Docket Number PB–97–10)

By letter dated August 29, 1997, CSX

Transportation, Incorporated (CSX)

seeks a temporary waiver of compliance

from certain provisions of the Railroad

Power Brake and Drawbars regulations,

49 CFR 232.25(d), concerning the

calibration of the front unit of a two-way

EOT device. Specifically, CSX wants

relief from the calibration and labeling

requirements for all front units until

December 31, 1997.

Section 232.25(d) states: The

telemetry equipment shall be calibrated

for accuracy according to the

manufacturer’s specifications at least

every 365 days. The date of the last

calibration, the location where the

calibration was made, and the name of

the person doing the calibration shall be

legibly displayed on a weather-resistant

sticker or other marking device affixed

to the outside of both the front unit and

rear unit. The Two-Way EOT Device

Final Rule was published on January 2,

1997, and became effective July 1, 1997.

FRA provided a grace period until

September 1, 1997, for railroads to

accomplish the calibration and labeling

requirements of front units.

CSX references a letter dated August

14, 1997, from the Association of

American Railroads (AAR) to FRA