Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 29 / Wednesday, February 12, 1997 / Notices 6601

Specific limitations with respect to

FAA’s approval of an airport Noise

Compatibility Program are delineated in

FAR Part 150, Section 150.5. Approval

is not a determination concerning the

acceptability of land uses under Federal,

State, or local law. Approval does not by

itself constitute an FAA implementing

action. A request for Federal action or

approval to implement specific noise

compatibility measures may be

required, and an FAA decision on the

request may require an environmental

assessment of the proposed action.

Approval does not constitute a

commitment by the FAA to financially

assist in the implementation of the

program nor a determination that all

measures covered by the program are

eligible for grant-in-aid funding from the

FAA. Where Federal funding is sought,

requests for project grants must be

submitted to the FAA Airports Division

office in Hawthorne, California.

The city of Riverside, California,

submitted to the FAA on July 6, 1995,

the Noise Exposure Maps, descriptions,

and other documentation produced

during the noise compatibility planning

study conducted from May 1994

through July 1995. The Riverside

Municipal Airport noise exposure maps

were determined by FAA to be in

compliance with applicable

requirements on September 12, 1995.

Notice of this determination was

published in the Federal Register on

September 22, 1995.

The Riverside Municipal Airport

study contains a proposed Noise

Compatibility Program comprised of

actions designed for phased

implementation by airport management

and adjacent jurisdictions from the date

of study completion to the year 1999. It

was requested that the FAA evaluate

and approve this material as a Noise

Compatibility Program as described in

Section 104(b) of the Act. The FAA

began its review of the program on July

8, 1996 and was required by a provision

of the Act to approve or disapprove the

program within 180 days (other than the

use of new flight procedures for noise

control). Failure to approve or

disapprove such program within the

180-day period shall be deemed to be an

approval of such program.

The submitted program contained

fourteen (14) proposed actions for noise

mitigation on and off the airport. The

FAA completed its review and

determined that the procedural and

substantive requirements of the Act and

FAR Part 150 have been satisfied. The

overall program, therefore, was

approved by the Associate

Administrator for Airports effective

January 3, 1997.

All fourteen (14) of the program

elements were approved. The following

six (6) elements were approved as

voluntary measures: Continue

designation of Runway 09/27 as the

preferential runway; continue IFR

departure turns over the Santa Ana

River for Runway 27 IFR departures;

continue the use of helicopter training

pattern procedures north of the airport;

encourage the use of AOPA Noise

Awareness Steps and NBAA noise

abatement departure and arrival

procedures; encourage the use of the

Sears store as a visual fix for Runway 27

VFR approaches; require that propeller

aircraft conduct pre-flight run-ups on

Taxiway C, at the end of Runway 27, be

oriented to a 315 degree heading

whenever possible. The following seven

(7) elements were approved outright:

Amend the General Plan to establish

airport noise compatibility standards;

designate land on the east side of

Hillside Avenue (on runway centerline)

for open space on the General Plan;

promote informal means of providing

fair disclosure of potential noise

impacts in airport area; maintain system

for receiving and responding to noise

complaints; publish a pilot guide;

review Noise Compatibility Plan

implementation; and, update the Noise

Exposure Maps and Noise Compatibility

Program as necessary on an ongoing

basis. One (1) element was approved

upon confirmation of a detailed

acoustical/design study to confirm the

benefits of a noise barrier and

refinement of the barrier’s location.

These determinations are set forth in

detail in a Record of Approval endorsed

by the Associate Administrator for

Airports on January 3, 1997. The Record

of Approval, as well as other evaluation

materials and the documents

comprising the submittal, are available

for review at the FAA office listed above

and at the administrative offices of the

city of Riverside, California.

Issued in Hawthorne, California, on

January 27, 1997.

Herman C. Bliss,

Manager, Airports Division, AWP–600,

Western-Pacific Region.

[FR Doc. 97–3406 Filed 2–11–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

[Summary Notice No. PE–97–8]

Petitions for Exemption; Summary of

Petitions Received; Dispositions of

Petitions Issued

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of petitions for

exemption received and of dispositions

of prior petitions.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to FAA’s rulemaking

provisions governing the application,

processing, and disposition of petitions

for exemption (14 CFR Part 11), this

notice contains a summary of certain

petitions seeking relief from specified

requirements of the Federal Aviation

Regulations (14 CFR Chapter I),

dispositions of certain petitions

previously received, and corrections.

The purpose of this notice is to improve

the public’s awareness of, and

participation in, this aspect of FAA’s

regulatory activities. Neither publication

of this notice nor the inclusion or

omission of information in the summary

is intended to affect the legal status of

any petition or its final disposition.

DATES: Comments on petitions received

must identify the petition docket

number involved and must be received

on or before February 18, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on any

petition in triplicate to: Federal

Aviation Administration, Office of the

Chief Counsel, Attn: Rule Docket (AGC–

200), Petition Docket No. lll, 800

Independence Avenue, SW.,

Washington, D.C. 20591.

Comments may also be sent

electronically to the following internet

address: nprmcmts@faa.dot.gov.

The petition, any comments received,

and a copy of any final disposition are

filed in the assigned regulatory docket

and are available for examination in the

Rules Docket (AGC–200), Room 915G,

FAA Headquarters Building (FOB 10A),

800 Independence Avenue, SW.,

Washington, D.C. 20591; telephone

(202) 267–3132.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Fred Haynes (202) 267–3939 or Angela

Anderson (202) 267–9781 Office of

Rulemaking (ARM–1), Federal Aviation

Administration, 800 Independence

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591.

This notice is published pursuant to

paragraphs (c), (e), and (g) of § 11.27 of

Part 11 of the Federal Aviation

Regulations (14 CFR Part 11).

Issued in Washington, DC, on February 6,

1997.

Donald P. Byrne,

Assistant Chief Counsel for Regulations.

Petitions for Exemption

Docket No.: 28794.

Petitioner: Atlantic Southwest

Airlines, Inc.

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

121.313(f) and (g).

Description of Relief Sought: To

permit the petitioner to operate its 63
6602 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 29 / Wednesday, February 12, 1997 / Notices

Embraer EMB–120 aircraft under part

121 with key locks not meeting the

standards required for part 121

operations for a temporary period until

June 1, 1997, when the replacement

locks required by part 121 can be

obtained from the supplier and installed

in the aircraft.

[FR Doc. 97–3404 Filed 2–11–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

[Summary Notice No. PE–97–7]

Petitions for Exemption; Summary of

Petitions Received; Dispositions of

Petitions Issued

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of petitions for

exemption received and of dispositions

of prior petitions.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to FAA’s rulemaking

provisions governing the application,

processing, and disposition of petitions

for exemption (14 CFR Part 11), this

notice contains a summary of certain

petitions seeking relief from specified

requirements of the Federal Aviation

Regulations (14 CFR Chapter I),

dispositions of certain petitions

previously received, and corrections.

The purpose of this notice is to improve

the public’s awareness of, and

participation in, this aspect of FAA’s

regulatory activities. Neither publication

of this notice nor the inclusion or

omission of information in the summary

is intended to affect the legal status of

any petition or its final disposition.

DATES: Comments on petitions received

must identify the petition docket

number involved and must be received

on or before March 4, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on any

petition in triplicate to: Federal

Aviation Administration, Office of the

Chief Counsel, Attn: Rule Docket (AGC–

200), Petition Docket No. lll , 800

Independence Avenue, SW.,

Washington, D.C. 20591.

Comments may also be sent

electronically to the following internet

address: nprmcmts@faa.dot.gov.

The petition, any comments received,

and a copy of any final disposition are

filed in the assigned regulatory docket

and are available for examination in the

Rules Docket (AGC–200), Room 915G,

FAA Headquarters Building (FOB 10A),

800 Independence Avenue, SW.,

Washington, D.C. 20591; telephone

(202) 267–3132.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fred

Haynes (202) 267–3939 or Angela

Anderson (202) 267–9681, Office of

Rulemaking (ARM–1), Federal Aviation

Administration, 800 Independence

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591.

This notice is published pursuant to

paragraphs (c), (e), and (g) of § 11.27 of

Part 11 of the Federal Aviation

Regulations (14 CFR Part 11).

Issued in Washington, D.C., on February 6,

1997.

Donald P. Byrne,

Assistant Chief Counsel for Regulations.

Disposition of Petitions

Docket No.: 25245.

Petitioner: Department of the Air

Force.

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

91.215(b).

Description of Relief Sought: To

permit the Department of the Air Force

to conduct certain military training

flight operations in designated airspace

above 10,000 feet above mean sea level

(MSL) without being required to operate

the aircraft transponders. Grant,

December 31, 1996, Exemption No.

4633F.

Docket No.: 27396.

Petitioner: Northwest Airlines, Inc.

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

121.401(c), 121.433(c)(1)(iii), 121.440(a),

121.441 (a)(1) and (b)(1), Appendix F to

part 121, and Special Federal Aviation

Regulation (SFAR) No. 58, paragraph

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

Description of Relief Sought: To

permit the petitioner to combine

recurrent flight and ground training and

proficiency checks for NWA’s flight

crewmembers in a single annual

training and proficiency evaluation

program and meet the line check

requirements of § 121.440(a) and SFAR

No. 58 through an FAA approved

alternative line check program. Grant,

December 26, 1996, Exemption No.

5815B.

Docket No.: 28097.

Petitioner: Columbia Helicopters, Inc.

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

133.19(a)(3) and 133.51.

Description of Relief Sought: To

permit the petitioner to conduct

external-load operations in the United

States using Canadian-registered

rotorcraft. Grant, December 30, 1996,

Exemption No. 6045A.

Docket No.: 28397.

Petitioner: Tulsa Technology Center.

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

65.17(a), 65.19(b), 65.75 (a) and (b).

Description of Relief Sought:

To permit Tulsa Technology Center

to: 1. Administer the FAA oral and

practical tests to students at times and

places identified in TTC’s Operations

Handbook.

2. Conduct oral and practical

mechanic tests as an integral part of the

education process rather than

conducting the tests upon students’

successful completion of the mechanic

written tests;

3. Approve students for retesting

within 30 days after failure without

requiring a signed statement certifying

that additional instruction has been

given in the failed area; and

4. Administer the AMG written test to

students immediately following

successful completion of the general

curriculum, prior to meeting the

experience requirements of § 65.77.

Grant, January 10, 1997, Exemption No.

6569.

Docket No.: 28677.

Petitioner: Bulldog Airlines, Inc.

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

133.43 (a) and (b).

Description of Relief Sought: To allow

the petitioner to use its helicopters to

perform external load operations for the

purpose of conducting human aerial

performances, without using an

approved external-load-attaching means

or an approved quick-release device.

Grant, December 26, 1996, Exemption

No. 6563.

Docket No.: 28706

Petitioner: National Warplane

Museum.

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

91.315.

Description of Relief Sought: To

permit the petitioner to carry passengers

on local flights for compensation or hire

in its limited category Boeing B–17

aircraft (B–17) in support of the

petitioner’s fundraising efforts. Grant,

December 27, 1996, Exemption No.

6565.

Docket No.: 28709.

Petitioner: William L. Hale.

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

91.109 (a) and (b)(3).

Description of Relief Sought: To

permit the petitioner to conduct certain

flight instruction and simulated

instrument flights to meet recent

instrument experience requirements in

certain Beechcraft airplanes equipped

with a functioning throwover control

wheel in place of functioning dual

controls. Grant, December 27, 1996,

Exemption No. 6564.

Docket No.: 28711.

Petitioner: Trans World Airlines, Inc.

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

121.434(c)(1)(ii).

Description of Relief Sought: To

permit Trans World Airlines, Inc., to

substitute a qualified and authorized

check airman for an FAA inspector to

observe a qualifying pilot in command

(PIC) while that PIC is performing

prescribed duties during at least one

flight leg that includes a takeoff and a