29776 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 104 / Monday, June 1, 1998 / Notices

Coast Guard involvement. Tank barges

would be encouraged to remain 25

nautical miles offshore, in compliance

with the Responsible Carriers Program,

and standard developed by the

American Waterway Operators.

Reporting

An effective way to monitor vessel

transits along the California coastline is

through the use of radio call-in points

at two key geographical points: Point

Sur and Point Arguello.

The work group also supports the

implementation of the Automatic

Identification System (AIS) for ships

currently being developed by the IMO.

AIS is an automated electronic vessel

position reporting system that transmits

a real-time positional information

packet to a shore based station such as

the Vessel Traffic Service (VTS).

A Near-Miss Reporting system is

currently under development at the

National level and will help to identify

causes of marine accidents and rectify

problem areas before accidents occur.

Traffic Separation Schemes (TSS)

To provide alignment with the

recommended routing measures, the

Santa Barbara Channel Traffic

Separation Scheme will be extended

approximately eighteen nautical miles

to Point Arguello. The southern leg of

the San Francisco TSS would be shifted

slightly to the west to provide a true

north-south alignment for vessels

entering and departing the TSS. These

recommended changes to the TSS have

been approved by the International

Maritime Organization (IMO) and are

ready for implementation.

Response to Disabled Vessels

There is a low but existing risk to the

resources of the Sanctuary from a

disabled vessel grounding on the rocky

shoreline. Timely response from one or

more appropriate vessels could make

the difference between an

environmental disaster and an

insignificant event. The work group

recommended the development of a

vessel response network to enable a

shoreside authority to identify and

locate vessels willing and able to

provide immediate emergency

assistance to a disabled vessel.

Informaiton on Services for

Individuals With Disabilities: For

information on facilities or services for

individuals with disabilities or to

request special assistance at the

meetings, contact the person under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT as soon

as possible.

Dated: May 22, 1998.

R. C. North,

Rear Admiral, Coast Guard, Assistant

Commandant for Marine, Safety and

Environmental Protection.

[FR Doc. 98–14393 Filed 5–29–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–15–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

FAA Approval of Noise Compatibility

Program and Determination on

Revised Noise Exposure Maps AkronCanton Regional Airport Akron, Ohio

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA) announces its

findings on the noise compatibility

program submitted by Akron-Canton

Regional Airport Authority under the

provisions of Title I of the Aviation

Safety and Noise Abatement Act of 1979

(Pub. L. 96–193) and 14 CFR Part 150.

These findings are made in recognition

of the description of Federal and

nonfederal responsibilities in Senate

Report No. 96–52 (1980). On October 16,

1997, the FAA determined that the

noise exposure maps submitted by

Akron-Canton Regional Airport

Authority under Part 150 were in

compliance with applicable

requirements. On April 9, 1998, the

Associate Administrator for Airports

approved the Akron-Canton Regional

Airport noise compatibility program.

Most of the recommendations of the

program were approved. The AkronCanton Regional Airport Authority has

also requested under FAR Part 150,

section 150.35(f), that FAA determine

that revised noise exposure maps

submitted with the noise compatibility

program and showing noise contours as

a result of the implementation of the

noise compatibility program are in

compliance with applicable

requirements of FAR Part 150. The FAA

announces its determination that the

revised noise exposure maps for AkronCanton Regional Airport for the years

submitted with the noise compatibility

program, are in compliance with

applicable requirements of FAR Part 150

effective May 13, 1998.

EFFECTIVE DATE: The effective date of the

FAA’s approval of the Akron-canton

Regional Airport noise compatibility

program is April 9, 1998. The effective

date of the FAA’s determination on the

revised noise exposure maps is May 13,

1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Lawrence C. King, program Manager,

Federal Aviation administration, Detroit

Airports District Office, Willow Run

Airport, East, 8820 Beck Road,

Belleville, Michigan 48111. Documents

reflecting this FAA action may be

reviewed at this same location.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This

notice announces that the FAA has

given its overall approval to the noise

compatibility program for Akron-Canton

Regional Airport, effective April 9,

1998, and that revised noise exposure

maps for 1997–2002 for this same

airport are determined to be in

compliance with applicable

requirements of FAR Part 150.

Under section 104(a) of the Aviation

Safety and Noise Abatement Act of 1979

(hereinafter referred to as ‘‘the Act’’), an

airport operator who has previously

submitted a noise exposure map may

submit to the FAA a noise compatibility

program which sets forth the measures

taken or proposed by the airport

operator for the reduction of existing

noncompatible land uses and

prevention of additional noncompatible

land uses within the area covered by the

noise exposure maps. The Act requires

such programs to be developed in

consultation with interested and

affected parties including local

communities, government agencies,

airport users, and FAA personnel.

Each airport noise compatibility

program developed in accordance with

Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part

150 is a local program, not a Federal

program. The FAA does not substitute

its judgment for that of the airport

proprietor with respect to which

measures should be recommended for

action. The FAA’s approval or

disapproval of FAR Part 150 program

recommendations is measured

according to the standards expressed in

Part 150 and the Act, and is limited to

the following determinations:

a. The noise compatibility program

was developed in accordance with the

provisions and procedures of FAR Part

150;

b. Program measures are reasonably

consistent with achieving the goals of

reducing existing noncompatible land

uses around the airport and preventing

the introduction of additional

noncompatible land uses;

c. Program measures would not create

an undue burden on interstate or foreign

commerce, unjustly discriminate against

types or classes of aeronautical uses,

violate the terms of airport grant

agreements, or intrude into areas

preempted by the Federal Government;

and
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 104 / Monday, June 1, 1998 / Notices 29777

d. Program measures relating to the

use of flight procedures can be

implemented within the period covered

by the program without derogating

safety, adversely affecting the efficient

use and management of the navigable

airspace and air traffic control systems,

or adversely affecting other powers and

responsibilities of the Administrator

prescribed by law.

Specific limitations with respect to

the 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 Detroit Airports

District Office in Belleville, Michigan.

Akron-Canton Regional Airport

Authority submitted to the FAA on

September 22, 1997, noise exposure

maps, descriptions, and other

documentation produced during the

noise compatibility planning study

conducted from July 20, 1995, through

September 22, 1997. The Akron-Canton

Regional Airport noise exposure maps

were determined by the FAA to be in

compliance with applicable

requirements on October 16, 1997.

Notice of this determination was

published in the Federal Register on

November 10, 1997.

The Akron-Canton Regional Airport

study contains a proposed noise

compatibility program comprised of

actions designed for phrased

implementation by airport management

and adjacent jurisdictions from the date

of study completion to beyond the year

2002. 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 October 16, 1997, 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

twenty-four 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 Associated

Administrator for Airports effective

April 9, 1998.

Outright approval was granted for

twenty-two of the specific program

elements. Noise Abatement Measure

NA–5 was disapproved. It

recommended that all eastbound and

southbound turbojet aircraft departing

on Runway 19 initiate at run to a

heading of 160 degrees at 1 nautical

mile from the radar instead of the

current voluntary procedure to turn at 2

nautical miles. 1 nautical mile from the

radar site is approximately over the

departure end of the runway. Flights

will be very low to the ground and at

relatively slow airspeed. Crews should

not be required or requested to initiate

turns at this critical phase of the flight.

Program Management Measure PM–5

was approved in part and disapproved

in part. The part that was approved

concerned the use of Automatic

Terminal Information Service (ATIS).

FAA permits the use of the ATIS for

short messages such as ‘‘noise

abatement procedures in effect’’ when

time and space permit. The part that

was disapproved concerned air traffic

control tower (ATCT) advisories. The

tower controller’s role to maintain safe,

efficient use of the navigable airspace

does not include educating pilots in

regard to specific noise abatement

procedures. Other measures are

available for pilot education.

Seven noise abatement measures were

approved. One measure recommends

pilots of all turbojet aircraft voluntarily

use noise abatement departure

procedures. One measure establishes

maximum climb departures for

helicopters. One measure recommends

that pilots of all turbojet aircraft

voluntarily restrict the use of reverse

thrust activity at night. One measure

recommends noise abatement

procedures for all eastbound turbojet

aircraft departing Runway 23.

Two measures relate to the location

and orientation of engine runups and

engine runup enclosures. One measure

recommends improvement of engine

runup and taxiing procedures.

Nine land use management measures

were approved. Two measures

recommends land acquisition for noise.

One measure recommends improvement

of engine runup and taxiing procedures.

Nine land use management measures

were approved. Two measures

recommended land acquisition for

noise. One measure recommends

development of a sound insulation

program. One measure recommended

that an avigation easement acquisition

program be developed. One measure

recommended overlay zoning for one

vacant parcel. One measure

recommends development of

subdivision regulations. One measure

recommends that fair disclosure

regulations be developed. One measure

recommends comprehensive planning

be developed. One measure

recommends capital improvement

planning.

Six program management measures

were approved. One measure

recommends updating noise complaint

receipt and response procedures. One

measure would establish a noise

monitoring system. One measure

recommends establishing a public

information program and publishing

informational pilot handouts. One

measure will designate a noise

abatement contact. One measure

recommends purchasing and installing

airside signs to advertise NCP measures.

One measure recommends NEM/NCP

review and revision.

These determinations are set forth in

detail in a Record of Approval endorsed

by the Associate Administrator for

Airports on April 9, 1998.

The FAA also has completed its

review of the revised noise exposure

maps and related descriptions

submitted by Akron-Canton Regional

Airport Authority. The specific maps

under consideration are Figure 8.2,

Pages 107–108 of the NEM, and Figure

4.1, Pages 43–44 of the NCP in the

submission. The FAA has determined

that these maps for Akron-Canton

Regional Airport are in compliance with

applicable requirements. This

determination is effective on May 13,

1998. FAA’s determination on an airport

operator’s noise exposure maps is

limited to a finding that the maps were

developed in accordance with the

procedures contained in appendix A of

FAR Part 150. Such determination does

not constitute approval of the

applicant’s data, information or plans.

If questions arise concerning the

precise relationship of specific

properties to noise exposure contours

depicted on a noise exposure map

submitted under section 103 of the Act,

it should be noted that the FAA is not

involved in any way in determining the

relative locations of specific properties

with regard to the depicted noise
29778 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 104 / Monday, June 1, 1998 / Notices

contours, or in interpreting the noise

exposure maps to resolve questions

concerning, for example, which

properties should be covered by the

provisions of section 107 of the Act.

These functions are inseparable from

the ultimate land use control and

planning responsibilities of local

government. These local responsibilities

are not changed in any way under Part

150 or through FAA’s review of noise

exposure maps. Therefore, the

responsibility for the detailed

overlaying of noise exposure contours

onto the map depicting properties on

the surface rests exclusively with the

airport operator which submitted those

maps, or with those public agencies and

planning agencies with which

consultation is required under section

103 of the Act. The FAA has relied on

the certification by the airport operator,

under section 150.21 of FAR Part 150,

that the statutorily required consultation

has been accomplished.

Copies of the noise exposure maps

and of the FAA’s evaluation of the

maps, and copies of the record of

approval and other evaluation materials

and documents which comprised the

submittal to the FAA are available for

examination at the following locations:

Federal Aviation Administration,

Detroit Airports District Office,

Willow Run Airport, East, 8820 Beck

Road, Belleville, Michigan 48111.

Mr. Frederick J. Krum, Director of

Aviation, Akron-Canton Regional

Airport, 5400 Lauby Road, N.W., P.O.

Box 9, North Canton, OH 44720–1598.

Questions on either of these FAA

determinations may be directed to the

individual named above under the

heading, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT.

Issued in Belleville, Michigan, on May 13,

1998.

Robert H. Allen,

Assistant Manager, Detroit Airports District

Office, Great Lakes Region.

[FR Doc. 98–14425 Filed 5–29–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Highway Administration

Environmental Impact Statement:

Newport News, Hampton, Norfolk,

Suffolk, Portsmouth and Chesapeake,

VA

AGENCY: Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Intent.

SUMMARY: The FHWA is reissuing this

notice to advise the public that an

environmental impact statement will be

prepared to determine the impact of a

proposed new crossing of Hampton

Roads in southeastern Virginia.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. Bruce Turner, Planning and

Environmental Manager, Federal

Highway Administration, The Dale

Building Suite 205, 1504 Santa Rosa

Road, Richmond, Virginia 23229,

Telephone: (804) 281–5100.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Federal Highway Administration

(FHWA), in cooperation with the

Virginia Department of Transportation

(VDOT), is reestablishing its intent to

prepare an environmental impact

statement (EIS) to determine the impact

of a proposed new crossing of Hampton

Roads in southeastern Virginia. A

previous Notice of Intent was published

on May 27, 1994. A Major Investment

Study (MIS), completed in accordance

with 23 CFR 450 Subpart C, was

published in October of 1997. The MIS

initially investigated various

alternatives developed to alleviate

congestion and improve access and

mobility across Hampton Roads. The

various alternatives ranged from

transportation demand management

strategies to constructing a new

crossing. After a screening of the initial

alternatives, the MIS studied 11

multimodal transportation corridors and

the no build alternative.

The EIS will examine reasonable

alternatives, including the no-build

alternative, in an area generally

bounded by the interchange of I–64/I–

664 on the north, I–64/I–564 on the east,

I–264/I–64 on the south, and the I–664

alignment on the west.

The Hampton Roads Metropolitan

Planning Organization selected a locally

preferred corridor in July of 1997, and

the Commonwealth Transportation

Board endorsed the locally preferred

corridor in September of 1997. Termini

for the preferred corridor consists of the

following: the intersection of I–64 and

I–644 in Hampton; the intersection of I–

264 and I–64 in Chesapeake; the

intersection of I–64 and I–564 in

Norfolk, and the intersection of VA 164

in Portsmouth. The proposed corridor

consists of a new crossing, which

connects Norfolk to southeastern

Newport News. It also includes a

connection to VA 164 in Portsmouth,

and it includes the widening of existing

I–664 and I–564. The proposed corridor

includes a multimodal component,

which could be used for reversible HOV

lanes, an exclusive busway, exclusive

truck lanes, and/or a passenger rail

system.

Regularly scheduled meetings with

Federal and State agencies will occur

during the study. A set of public

meetings, one on the Southside and one

on the Peninsula, will be held to present

the results of the Draft EIS. In addition,

a set of formal public hearings will be

held. The Draft EIS will be available for

public and agency review and comment

prior to the hearings. Public notice will

be given of the time and place of the

meetings and hearings. Additional

public outreach will occur through the

issuance of project newsletters and a

project home page, which will be

accessible through VDOT’s Internet site

(www.vdot,state.va.us). A formal

scoping meeting will be held.

To ensure that the full range of issues

related to this project 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 direct to

the FHWA at the address 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

proposed action.)

(Authority: 23 U.S.C. 315: 49 CFR 1.48)

Issued on: May 13, 1998.

J. Bruce Turner,

Planning and Environmental Manager,

Richmond, Virginia.

[FR Doc. 98–14320 Filed 5–29–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–22–M

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service

Proposed Collection; Comment

Request For Form 8655

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS),

Treasury.

ACTION: Notice and request for

comments.

SUMMARY: The Department of the

Treasury, as part of its continuing effort

to reduce paperwork and respondent

burden, invites the general public and

other Federal agencies to take this

opportunity to comment on proposed

and/or continuing information

collections, as required by the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,

Public Law 104–13 (44 U.S.C.

3506(c)(2)(A)). Currently, the IRS is

soliciting comments concerning Form

8655, reporting Agent Authorization for

Magnetic Tape/Electronic Filers.