Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 78 /Thursday, April 23, 1998 / Notices 20243

Other Environmental Considerations

Home Port

The design, permitting, construction,

and operation of the Home port would

be managed under the jurisdiction of the

state, regional, county, municipal, and

port authorities of the Port of Long

Beach, California. The Navy, as part of

the California Environmental Quality

Act Process, submitted the Mole EA to

the California Coastal Commission for

review, which determined the proposed

Home Port activities were not

inconsistent with the California Coastal

Zone Management Program. The Port of

Long Beach has approved the

construction and operation of the Home

Port through the Harbor Development

Permit process. One of the standard

conditions in the Harbor Development

Permit is that SLLP will follow all

applicable Federal, state, and local laws

and regulations, including those

pertaining to safety and the

environment.

No Action Alternative

Under the No Action alternative the

SLLP would not launch satellites from

the Pacific Ocean and the Port of Long

Beach would remain available for other

commercial or government ventures.

The goals of 49 U.S.C. Subtitle IX, ch.

701 Commercial Space Launch

Activities, would not be realized.

Predicted environmental impacts of the

proposed launch activities would not

occur and the project area would remain

in its current state.

Determination

An analysis of the proposed action

has concluded that there are no

significant short-term or long-term

effects to the environment or

surrounding populations. After careful

and thorough consideration of the facts

contained herein, the undersigned finds

that the proposed Federal action is

consistent with existing national

environmental policies and objectives as

set forth in section 101(a) of the

National Environmental Policy Act of

1969 (NEPA) and that it will not

significantly affect the quality of the

human environment or otherwise

include any condition requiring

consultation pursuant to section

102(2)(C) of NEPA. Therefore, an

Environmental Impact Statement for the

proposed action would not be required.

Issued in Washington, DC on April 17,

1998.

Manuel F. Vega,

Acting Deputy Associate Administrator for

Commercial Space Transportation.

[FR Doc. 98–10748 Filed 4–22–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Intent To Rule on Application

98–04–C–00–BTM To Impose and Use

the Revenue From a Passenger Facility

Charge (PFC) at Bert Mooney Airport,

Submitted by the Bert Mooney Airport

Authority, Butte, Montana

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 PFC

revenue at Bert Mooney Airport under

the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 40117 and

Part 158 of the Federal Aviation

Regulations (14 CFR 158).

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before May 26, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Comments on this

application may be mailed or delivered

in triplicate to the FAA at the following

address: David P. Gabbert, Manager;

Helena Airports District Office; Federal

Aviation Administration; 2725 Skyway

Drive, Suite 2; Helena, Montana 59602–

1213.

In addition, one copy of any

comments submitted to the FAA must

be mailed or delivered to Mr. Rick

Griffith, Airport Manager, at the

following address: Bert Mooney Airport,

101 Airport Road, Butte, Montana

59701.

Air Carriers and foreign air carriers

may submit copies of written comments

previously provided to Bert Mooney

Airport, under section 158.23 of Part

158.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David P. Gabbert, Manager; Helena

Airports District Office; Federal

Aviation Administration; 2725 Skyway

Drive, Suite 2; Helena, Montana 59602–

1213; Phone (406) 449–5271. 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 98–04–C–

00–BTM to impose and use PFC revenue

at Bert Mooney Airport under the

provisions of 49 U.S.C. 40117 and Part

158 of the Federal Aviation Regulations

(14 CFR Part 158).

On April 16, 1998, the FAA

determined that the application to

impose and use the revenue from a PFC

submitted by the Bert Mooney Airport

Authority, Bert Mooney Airport, Butte,

Montana, 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 July

24, 1998.

The following is a brief overview of

the application.

Level of the proposed PFC: $3.00

Proposed charge effective date:

February 1, 2000

Proposed charge expiration date:

January 31, 2002

Total requested for use approval:

$215,040

Brief description of proposed project:

Land acquisition in fee for Runway

Protection Zone, approach and

transition areas and land acquisition for

security fence improvements.

Class or classes of air carriers which

the public agency has requested not be

required to collect PFC’s: On demand

non-scheduled Air Taxi/Commercial

operators.

Any person may inspect the

application in person at the FAA office

listed above under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT and at the FAA

Regional Airports Office located at:

Federal Aviation Administration,

Northwest Mountain Region, Airports

Division, ANM–600, 1601 Lind Avenue

S.W., Suite 315, Renton, WA 98055–

4056.

In addition, any person may, upon

request, inspect the application, notice

and other documents germane to the

application in person at the Bert

Mooney Airport.

Issued in Renton, Washington on April 16,

1998.

David A. Field,

Manager, Planning, Programming and

Capacity Branch Northwest Mountain Region.

[FR Doc. 98–10807 Filed 4–22–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

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 March

1998, there were eight applications

approved. This notice also includes
20244 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 78 /Thursday, April 23, 1998 / Notices

information on one application,

approved in February 1998,

inadvertently left off the February 1998

notice. Additionally, three 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) (Public Law 101–508) and Part

158 of the Federal Aviation Regulations

(14 CFR Part 158). This notice is

published pursuant to paragraph d of

section 158.29.

PFC Applications Approved

Public Agency: Airport Authority of

Washoe County, Reno, Nevada.

Application Number: 98–03–C–00–

RNO.

Application Type: Impose and use a

PFC.

PFC Level: $3.00.

Total PFC Revenue Approved in This

Decision: $22,855,013.

Earliest Charge Effective Date: May 1,

1998.

Estimated Charge Expiration Date:

July 1, 2000.

Class of Air Carriers Not Required to

Collect PFC’s: Air taxi/commercial

operators filing FAA Form 1800–31.

Determination: Approved. Based on

information 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 Reno/Tahoe

International Airport.

Brief Descripotion of Projects

Approved for Collection and Use:

Passenger loading bridges.

Taxiway B design and reconstruction.

Terminal complex schematic design.

Terminal apron construction—phases I

and II.

North perimeter road reconstruction/

overlay.

Aircraft rescue and firefighting (ARFF)

truck.

Terminal building doors.

Fire sprinkler system.

Taxiway A reconstruction and design.

Decision Date: February 27, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Maryls Vandervelde, San Francisco

Airports District Office, (650) 876–2806.

Public Agency: City of Tallahassee,

Florida.

Application Number: 98–03–C–00–

TLH.

Application Type: Impose and use a

PFC.

PFC Level: $3.00.

Total PFC Revenue Approved in, This

Decision: $5,988,942.

Earliest Charge Effective Date: June 1,

1998.

Estimated Charge Expiration Date:

July 1, 2003.

Class of Air Carriers Not Required to

Collect PFC’s: Part 135 air taxi/

commercial operators filing FAA Form

1800–31.

Determination: Approved. Based on

information 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 Tallahassee Regional

Airport.

Brief Description of Projects Approved

for Collection and Use:

Computerized airfield lighting control.

Terminal title roof (replacement).

Runway 9/27 erosion control.

Taxiway T relocation.

ARFF road improvements.

Miscellaneous airfield improvements.

T-hangar access taxiway.

ARFF storm water improvements.

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)

accessibility ramps.

Part 150 noise mitigation/land

acquisition (planning).

Disabled passenger lift (device).

Taxiway/apron improvements (design

only).

Taxiway H and M widening.

Runway 18/36 lighting and shoulder

improvements.

Terminal service/access road

improvements (professional services).

Part 150 noise mitigation/land

acquisition implementation.

Brief Description of Project Approved

in Part for Collection and Use: PFC

administration costs.

Determination: Partially and

conditionally approved. Documents

submitted to the FAA in support of this

project were insufficient to establish

that all project costs will be necessary

for the preparation, administration,

auditing and financial completion/

close-out of the PFC application.

Specifically, the costs for annual audits,

staff labor, and miscellaneous expenses

were not substantiated. In addition, the

cost for microcomputer software

acquisition was determined to be

ineligible for PFC funding. Therefore,

the FAA has only approved $15,000 of

the public agency’s request (of $87,000)

for this project. The approved amount

represents the consultant fees for

preparation and financial completion/

close-out of the PFC application and

anticipated amendments.

Brief Description of Projects

Withdrawn: Security gates/fencing

system upgrades design only. Bond

financing costs.

Determination: The public agency

withdrew these projects by

memorandum dated December 12, 1997.

Therefore, the FAA did not rule on

these projects in this decision.

Taxiway improvements—construction.

Apron improvements—construction.

Determination: By memorandum

dated December 12, 1997, the public

agency withdrew these projects until

such time as the design of these projects

is completed and pavement areas

requiring rehabilitation are identified.

Therefore, the FAA did not rule on

these projects in this decision.

Terminal service road improvements—

construction.

Terminal access road improvements—

construction.

Determination: By memorandum

dated December 12, 1997, the public

agency withdrew these projects until

such time as the design of these projects

is completed. Therefore, the FAA did

not rule on these projects in this

decision.

Decision Date: March 3, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Richard Owen, Orlando Airports

District Office, (407) 812–6331.

Public Agency: City of Rhinelander

and County of Oneida, Rhinelander,

Wisconsin.

Application Number: 98–04–U–00–

RHI.

Application Type: Use PFC revenue.

PFC Level: $3.00.

Total PFC Revenue To Be Used in

This Decision: $192,750.

Charge Effective Date: June 1, 1996.

Estimated Charge Expiration Date:

January 1, 2001.

Class of Air Carriers Not Required To

Collect PFC’s: No change from previous

decision.

Brief Description of Project Approved

for Use: Terminal building

improvements.

Decision Date: March 10, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Nancy M. Nistler, Minneapolis Airports

District Office, (612) 713–4250.

Public Agency: Metropolitan Airport

Authority of Rock Island County,

Moline, Illinois.

Application Number: 98–02–C–00–

MLI.

Application Type: Impose and use a

PFC.

PFC Level: $3.00.

Total PFC Revenue Approved in This

Decision: $5,128,404.

Earliest Charge Effective Date:

November 1, 2008.

Estimated Charge Expiration Date:

January 1, 2026.

Class of Air Carriers Not Required To

Collect PFC’s: Part 135 unscheduled air

taxi/commercial operators.
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 78 /Thursday, April 23, 1998 / Notices 20245

Determination: Approved. Based on

information contained 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 Quad City

International Airport.

Brief Description of Projects Approved

for Use: North ramp replacement, phase

V. Taxiways Delta, Echo, and Kilo

improvements.

Brief Description of Projects Approved

for Collection and Use:

Multiple user flight information display

system.

Land reimbursement.

New entrance road and entrance road

improvements; signage.

Equipment purchase: runway friction

testing vehicle; broom/blower snow

removal units; endloader.

Decision Date: March 12, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mark McClardy, Chicago Airports

District Office, (847) 294–7435.

Public Agency: City of Chicago,

Department of Aviation, Chicago,

Illinois.

Application Number: 98–07–C–00–

ORD.

Application Type: Impose and use a

PFC.

PFC Level: $3.00.

Total PFC Revenue Approved in This

Decision: $61,717,809.

Earliest Charge Effective Date: July 1,

2004.

Estimated Charge Expiration Date:

April 1, 2005.

Class of Air Carriers Not Required To

Collect PFC’s: Air taxi operators.

Determination: Approved. Based on

the information contained 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 Chicago

O’Hare International Airport.

Brief Description of Projects Approved

for Collection and Use:

H5043—Guard Post 2—site

improvements.

H6060—Runway 4L/22R rehabilitation.

H6069—Security enhancements at

former military base.

H8001–97—Additional school

soundproofing.

H1060—Upgrade of intergraph

computer aided dispatch to Windows

NT platform.

H1062—Identification badging system

upgrade.

Brief Description of Projects Approved

in Part for Collection and Use

H6059—Runway 4R/22L rehabilitation.

Determination: Partially approved.

The City of Chicago had requested full

PFC funding of this project; however,

subsequent to submission of the

application, the City received AIP

funding to pay a portion of the costs.

Therefore, the PFC amount was

reduced.

H5048—Airport transit system

improvements.

Determination: Partially approved. A

portion of this project, acquisition of

jacks, was ineligible for PFC funding

because this equipment is for the

performance of recurrent maintenance

on the vehicles.

H9706—Acquisition of 1997 equipment.

Determination: Partially approved.

The second fire pumper truck is

ineligible for PFC funding in accordance

with Program Guidance Letter 91–8.2. In

addition, the noise office education

vehicle was determined to be ineligible

for PFC funding in accordance with

paragraph 713(f) of FAA Order

5100.38A, AIP Handbook (October 24,

1989).

Brief Description of Disapproved

Project: H1061—Global positioning

system for O’Hare communications

center.

Determination: Disapproved. The

FAA has determined that this project is

not eligible for PFC or AIP funding. The

global positioning system for vehicles is

currently only eligible for a specific

number of ARFF vehicles required by

Part 139 at airports having operations

below 1,200 feet runway visual range.

This project did not include any such

eligible vehicles.

Decision Date: March 16, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Philip M. Smithmeyer, Chicago Airports

District Office, (847) 294–7335.

Public Agency: Central West Virginia

Airport Regional Authority, Charleston,

West Virginia.

Application Number: 98–03–C–00–

CRW.

Application Type: Impose and use a

PFC.

PFC Level: $3.00.

Total PFC Revenue Approved in This

Decision: $662,687.

Earliest Charge Effective Date:

November 1, 1998.

Estimated Charge Expiration Date:

December 1, 1999.

Class of Air Carriers Not Required to

Collect PFC’s: Part 135 and Part 121

charter operators for hire to the general

public.

Determination: Approved. Based on

information contained in the public

agency’s application, the FAA has

determined that each proposed class

accounts for less than 1 percent of the

total annual enplanements at Yeager

Airport.

Brief Description of Projects Approved

for Collection and Use

Replace portions of the main terminal

roof.

Install commuter walkway system.

Replace perimeter fence.

Overlay asphalt apron in the general

aviation area.

Brief Description of Projects Approved

for Collection Only:

Repair slide area, taxiway C.

Rehabilitation of loop road.

Purchase and install baggage handling

systems.

Rehabilitation of concrete portions of

runway 5/23.

Brief Description of Projects

Withdrawn:

Purchase quick dash truck.

Purchase new 1,500 gallon truck.

Purchase snow broom.

Determination: These projects were

withdrawn by the public agency by

letter dated January 21, 1998. Therefore,

the FAA will not rule on these projects

in this decision.

Decision Date: March 20, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Elonza Turner, Beckley Airports Field

Office, (304) 252–6216.

Public Agency: City of Bismarck,

North Dakota.

Application Number: 98–02–C–00–

BIS.

Application Type: Impose and use a

PFC.

PFC Level: $3.00.

Total PFC Revenue Approved in This

Decision: $1,474,422.

Earliest Charge Effective Date: June 1,

1998.

Estimated Charge Expiration Date:

December 1, 2002.

Class of Air Carriers Not Required to

Collect PFC’s:

(1) All on demand air taxi/commercial

operators filing FAA Form 1800–31 that

enplane fewer than 500 passengers per

year and do not have their base of

operations at Bismarck Municipal

Airport; and (2) all on demand air taxi

commercial operators filing FAA Form

1800–31 which have their base of

operations at Bismarck Municipal

Airport.

Determination: Approved. Based on

information 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 Bismarck Municipal

Airport.

Brief Description of Projects Approved

for Collection and Use

Rehabilitate general aviation ramp.

Terminal building, ADA compliance.

Design and relocation of Airway Avenue

(Yegen Road).
20246 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 78 /Thursday, April 23, 1998 / Notices

Reconstruct, widen, and extend runway

3/21.

PFC application preparation.

Improve existing airfield service road.

Preparation of plans and specifications

for the rehabilitation of runway 13/31

and taxiway A.

Rehabilitate runway 13/31.

Rehabilitate runway 13/31 lighting.

Rehabilitate taxiway A.

Brief Description of Project Approved

for Collection: Rehabilitate baggage

claim area.

Decision Date: March 24, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Irene R. Porter, Bismarck Airports

District Office, (701) 250–4358.

Public Agency: County of Jefferson,

Beaumont, Texas.

Application Number: 98–03–C–00–

BPT.

Application Type: Impose and use a

PFC.

PFC Level: $3.00.

Total PFC Revenue Approved in This

Decision: $667,020.

Earliest Charge Effective Date: August

1, 1998.

Estimated Charge Expiration Date:

November 1, 2000.

Class of Air Carriers Not Required to

Collect PFC’s: None

Brief Description of Projects Approved

for Collection and Use: Airfield safety

improvements: Rehabilitate runway 16/

34, phase II; widen taxiways C, E, G,

and H; install runway end identifier

lights for runways 30 and 34; acquire

airfield sweeper.

Airport entrance signs.

Widen taxiway D.

ARFF facility.

Ground level covered passenger

walkway.

PFC application and administrative

costs.

Decision Date: March 25, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ben

Guttery, Southwest Region Airports

Division, (817) 222–5614.

Public Agency: Kenton County

Airport Board, Covington, Kentucky.

Application Number: 98–03–C–00–

CVG.

Application Type: Impose and use a

PFC.

PFC Level: $3.00.

Total PFC Revenue Approved in This

Decision: $21,097,000.

Earliest Charge Effective Date: June 1,

1998.

Estimated Charge Expiration Date:

April 1, 1999.

Class of Air Carriers not Required to

Collect PFC’s:

(1) Part 121 supplemental operators

which operate at Cincinnati/Northern

Kentucky International Airport without

an operating agreement with the public

agency and enplane less than 1,500

passengers per year; and (2) Part 135 on

demand air taxis, both fixed wing and

rotary.

Determination: Approved. Based on

the information contained in the public

agency’s application, the FAA has

determined that each proposed class

accounts for less than 1 percent of the

total annual enplanements at

Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky

International Airport.

Brief Description of Projects Approved

for Collection and Use:

ARFF equipment (quick response truck).

Taxiway K and hold apron.

Taxiway S extension.

Field equipment.

Northwest environmental collection

system.

North crossfield taxiway.

Runway 9/27 extension: clear, drain,

and grade.

Field lighting to new tower.

Runway 9/27 extension: pave and light.

Taxiway S and tunnel extension.

Environmental impact statement

(runway 18R/36L/master plan

projects).

Part 150 study.

Taxiway M rehabilitation.

Decision Date: March 31, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Peggy S. Kelley, Memphis Airports

District Office, (901) 544–3495.

Amendments to PFC Approvals:

Amendment number city, state Amendment

approved date

Original approved net

PFC revenue

Amended approved net

PFC revenue

Original estimated charge

expired date

Amended estimated charge

expired date

93–01–C–04–CRW Charleston, WV .................................... 02/26/98 $2,489,473 $2,504,316 11/01/09 11/01/98

94–01–C–04–CVG Covington, KY ....................................... 03/25/98 43,267,000 37,146,000 09/01/00 06/01/98

95–02–C–01–CVG Covington, KY ....................................... 03/25/98 111,930,000 85,441,000 09/01/00 06/01/98

Issued in Washington, DC, on April 16,

1998.

Eric Gabler,

Manager, Passenger Facility Charge Branch.

[FR Doc. 98–10805 Filed 4–22–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

Denial of Motor Vehicle Defect Petition

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration (NHTSA),

Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Denial of petition for a defect

investigation.

SUMMARY: This notice sets forth the

reasons for the denial of a petition

submitted to NHTSA under 49 U.S.C.

30162, requesting that the agency

commence a proceeding to determine

the existence of a defect related to motor

vehicle safety. The petition is

hereinafter identified as DP98–003.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.

George Chiang, Office of Defects

Investigation (ODI), NHTSA, 400

Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC

20590. Telephone: (202) 366–5206.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Ms. Lisa

Smith of Newburgh, Indiana, submitted

a petition dated February 24, 1998,

requesting that an investigation be

initiated to determine whether Model

Year (MY) 1989 Chrysler minivans

(Voyagers) contain a defect related to

motor vehicle safety within the meaning

of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301. The petition

alleges that MY 1989 Plymouth

Voyagers have a defective automatic

transmission that can fail early in the

life of the vehicle and require a costly

repair.

In her petition letter, Ms. Smith stated

that ‘‘I am filing this petition against the

Chrysler Plymouth Corp. for their

failure to produce a quality transmission

in the 1989 minivans (Voyagers).

Starting in 1989 model vans they

installed a transmission that was faulty

in its performance * * * I feel Chrysler

is putting quantity before quality * * *

I request you have a hearing on this

costly issue. In the meantime I will be

paying my repair bill for my 3rd

transmission.’’

Clearly, failure of her transmission

with the high cost of its replacement is