Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 129 /Tuesday, July 7, 1998 / Notices 36731

PFC application formulation expense:

environmental overview; application

legal services; other application costs.

Determination: Partially approved.

The environmental review is not

considered a PFC application

formulation expense; however, this is

considered to be an eligible element of

a planning study under AIP criteria,

paragraph 406(r) of FAA Order

5100.38A, AIP Handbook. The approved

amount was reduced from the amount

requested based on actual costs as

shown in the public agency’s letter

dated December 19, 1997.

Backflow prevention valves.

Determination: Partially approved.

Utility projects are eligible to the extent

they are needed to serve eligible airport

development. The allowable cost of any

installation serving both eligible and

ineligible areas or facilities will be a

prorated share of the total project cost.

The FAA has determined that

approximately 72 percent of the total

project costs are eligible.

Terminal heating piping replacement.

Determination: Partially approved.

Terminal building projects involve work

in both eligible and ineligible areas. PFC

funding is limited to non revenue

producing public-use areas that are

directly related to the movement of

passengers and baggage in air commerce

within the boundaries of the airport.

The FAA has determined that

approximately 72 percent of the total

project costs are eligible.

Brief Description of Projects

Disapproved for Collection at CMH and

Use at CMH: Satellite landing system.

Determination: Disapproved. This

project has been determined to not be

justified under PFC criteria. The

requested global positioning system

differential ground station equipment is

not required for precision approaches at

CMH. In addition, this equipment is not

yet approved by the FAA for

installation.

Signage standards manual.

Determination: Disapproved. This

project does not meet the objectives test

for FPC eligibility in § 158.15(a).

South ramp settlement study.

Determination: Disapproved.

Paragraph 300(b) of FAA Order

5100.38A (October 24, 1989) indicates

that the separate funding of projects for

the preparation of plans and

specifications is allowable if the airport

development has every expectation of

beginning within 2 years. Inasmuch as

this project was completed in 1993 and

a project to correct the settlement

problem has not been started and is not

in this application, the FAA has no

expectation that this project will be

started within 2 years, as required by

§ 158.33(a)(1). In addition, the FAA has

determined that this project does not

confirm to the eligible master planning

elements in paragraph 406 of FAA

Order 5100.38A, and is not, therefore,

considered to be eligible planning work.

Therefore, this study/preliminary

engineering project is being disapproved

at this time.

Bolton Field—airport layout plan and

Exhibit A.

Determination: Disapproved. This

project does not meet the objective test

for PFC eligibility in § 158.15(a), namely

it does not preserve or enhance safety,

security, or capacity; reduce noise or

mitigate noise impacts; not does it

furnish opportunities for enhanced

competition.

Decision Date: May 29, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mary Jagiello, Detroit Airports District

Office, (313) 487–7296.

Public Agency: Ports of Chelan and

Douglas, Wenatchee Washington.

Application Number: 98–02–00–EAT.

Application Type: Impose and use a

PFC.

PFC Level: $3.00.

Total PFC Revenue Approved in this

Decision: $307,000.

Earliest Charge Effective Date: June 1,

1998.

Estimated Charge Expiration Date:

October 1, 2000.

Class of Air Carriers not Required to

Collect PFC’s: None.

Brief Description of Projects Approved

for Collection and Use:

Reconstruct runway 12/30.

Property acquisition on approach

runway 30.

Properry acquisition on approach

runway 12.

Taxiway G lighting and signage.

Access road improvements.

Acquire passenger access lift.

Equipment storage building for SRE.

Acquire SRE.

Decision Date: May 29, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mary Vargas, Seattle Airports District

Office, (425) 227–2660.

AMENDMENTS TO PFC APPROVALS

Amendment No. city, state Approved

date

Original approved net

PFC revenue

Amended

approved

net PFC

revenue

Original estimated

charge exp.

date

Amended

estimated

charge exp.

date

93–02–C–02–MEI, Meridian, MS ............................................................. 03/26/98 $155.223 $154,390 12/01/00 12/01/00

97–04–C–01–MEI, Meridian, MS ............................................................. 04/24/98 32,500 45,000 12/01/00 03/01/01

93–01–C–01–MRY, Monterey, CA ........................................................... 04/30/98 3,960,855 5,455,672 06/01/00 12/01/01

97–02–C–01–DSM, Des Moines, IA ........................................................ 05/08/98 3,574,928 9,713,654 07/01/99 12/01/01

95–03–C–02–GPT, Gulfport, MS ............................................................. 05/19/98 3,464,600 4,608,400 12/01/01 02/01/02

95–01–C–01–CMI, Champaign, IL ........................................................... 05/21/98 1,154,307 1,327,400 11/01/98 05/01/99

94–01–C–01–LBE, Latrobe, PA ............................................................... 05/29/98 187,266 1,397,687 10/01/98 05/01/13

Issued in Washington, DC on June 26,

1998.

Eric Gabler,

Manager, Passenger Facility Charge Branch.

[FR Doc. 98–17854 Filed 7–6–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance

System (TCAS) Airborne Equipment,

TCAS II

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of availability for public

comment.

SUMMARY: This notice announces the

availability of and requests comments

on a proposed Technical Standard

Order (TSO) pertaining to traffic alert

and collision avoidance system (TCAS)

airborne equipment, TCAS II. The

proposed TSO prescribes the minimum

operational performance standards that

TCAS II equipment must meet to be

identified with the marking ‘‘TSO–

C119b.’’
36732 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 129 /Tuesday, July 7, 1998 / Notices

DATES: Comments must identify the

TSO file number and be received on or

before August 17, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Send all comments on the

proposed technical standard order to:

Technical Programs and Continued

Airworthiness Branch, AIR–120,

Aircraft Engineering Division, Aircraft

Certification Service, Federal Aviation

Administration, 800 Independence

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591.

Or deliver comments to: Federal

Aviation Administration, Room 815,

800 Independence Avenue, SW.,

Washington, DC 20591. Comments must

identify the TSO file number.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.

Bobbie J. Smith, Technical Programs

and Continued Airworthiness Branch,

AIR–120, Aircraft Engineering Division,

Aircraft Certification Service, Federal

Aviation Administration, 800

Independence Avenue, SW.,

Washington, DC 20591, FAX No. (202)

267–5340.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

Interested persons are invited to

comment on the proposed TSO listed in

this notice by submitting such written

data, views, or arguments as they desire

to the above specified address.

Comments received on the proposed

technical standard order may be

examined, before and after the comment

closing date, in Room 815, FAA

Headquarters Building (FOB–10A), 800

Independence Avenue, SW.,

Washington, DC 20591, weekdays

except Federal holidays, between 8:30

a.m. and 4:30 p.m. All communications

received on or before the closing date

for comments specified above will be

considered by the Director of the

Aircraft Certification Service before

issuing the final TSO.

Background

This TSO is proposed to provide for

performance enhancement to Traffic

Alert and Collision Avoidance System II

(TCAS II) Airborne Equipment. There

have been a significant number of

changes to the TCAS II software.

Version 7.0 of the TCAS II will also be

utilized by ICAO member states with

the mandates for equipage of Airborne

Collision Avoidance System (ACAS II).

Areas of improvement include TCAS–

TCAS reversal, horizontal miss distance

filtering, surveillance improvements to

extend effective range and reduce

interference in high density traffic areas,

reduction of nuisance Traffic Advisories

operating in Reduced Vertical

Separation Minimum (RVSM) airspace,

etc. Also, display and aural changes

were made to improve flight crew

recognition and understanding issues.

Marking is addition to those required

by 14 CFR 21.607 would be required for

TSO–C119b articles.

The proposed TSO would require the

TSOA holder to provide the article

purchaser with certain data described in

Paragraph 5 of proposed TSO–C119b.

Data that would be furnished with each

manufactured article includes operating

instructions and equipment limitations,

installation procedures, limitations, and

related information, equipment

specifications and designations,

maintenance instructions, and

environmental qualification forms.

Additional information would be

required for articles that accomplish

additional functions; that information

would need to be sent to the purchaser

once, even if several identical articles

are purchased.

How to Obtain Copies

A copy of the proposed TSO–C119b

may be obtained via Internet (http:/

www.faa.gov/avr/air/100home.htm) or

on request from the office listed under

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

Copies of RTCA, Inc. Document No.

DO–185A, ‘‘Minimum Operational

Performance Standards for An Active

Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance

System II (TCAS II) Airborne

Equipment,’’ dated December 16, 1997.

RTCA Document No. 160D,

‘‘Environmental Conditions and Test

Procedures for Airborne Equipment,’’

dated July 29, 1997; and RTCA

Document No. DO–178B, ‘‘Software

Considerations in Airborne Systems and

Equipment Certification,’’ dated 1, 1992,

may be purchased from the RTCA Inc.,

1140 Connecticut Avenue, NW., Suite

1020, Washington, DC 20036.

Issued in Washington, DC, on June 30,

1998.

Abbas A. Rizvi,

Acting Manager, Aircraft Engineering

Division, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 98–17943 Filed 7–6–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

Petition for Waiver of Compliance

In accordance with title 49 CFR 211.9

and 211.41, notice is hereby given that

the following railroads have petitioned

the Federal Railroad Administration

(FRA) for exemption from or waiver of

compliance with a requirement of its

safety standards. Their petitions are

described below, including the

regulatory provisions involved, and the

nature of the relief being requested.

Interested parties are invited to

participate in these proceedings by

submitting written views, data or

comments. FRA does not anticipate

scheduling a public hearing in

connection with these proceedings since

the facts do not appear to warrant a

hearing. If any interested party desires

an opportunity for oral comment, they

should notify FRA, in writing, before

the end of the comment period and

specify the basis of their request.

All communications concerning these

proceedings should identify the

appropriate waiver petition docket

number and must be submitted in

triplicate to the Docket Clerk, Office of

Chief Counsel, Federal Railroad

Administration, Nassif Building, 400

Seventh Street SW., Mail Stop 10,

Washington, DC 20590.

Communications received within 45

days of the date of publication of this

notice will be considered by FRA before

final action is taken. Comments received

after that date will be considered as far

as practicable. All written

communications concerning these

proceedings are available for

examination during regular business

hours (9 a.m. to 5 p.m.) in Room 7051,

1120 Vermont Street, NW., Washington,

DC. The individual petitions are as

follows:

National Railroad Passenger

Corporation (Amtrak)

FRA Waiver Petition Docket No. HS–98–

01

Amtrak requests a waiver to maintain

train and engine employee’s hours of

duty records in an electronic program in

lieu of manually signed paper records.

Florida East Coast Railway Company

(FEC)

FRA Waiver Petition Docket No. HS–98–

02

FEC requests a waiver to utilize their

‘‘Paperless Time Ticket Program’’ to

produce an electronic record of train

and engine employee hours of duty in

lieu of manually signed paper records.

Both Amtrak and the FEC request a

waiver of compliance with certain

provisions of FRA Safety Regulations

(Hours of Service of Railroad

Employees). The waivers requested seek

relief from Title 49 Code of Federal

Regulations (CFR) Part 228.9(a)(1) for

each railroad to utilize a computerized

system of recording hours of duty data.

Part 228.9(a)(1) requires that records

maintained under Part 228 be signed by

the employee whose time is being

recorded, or in the case of train and

engine crews, signed by the ranking

crew member. Amtrak and the FEC seek