41318 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 148 / Monday, August 3, 1998 / Notices

BAHAMAS, THE

(In North America, CANADA DOES

NOT QUALIFY for this year’s Diversity

Program.)

Applicants must meet ALL eligibility

requirements under the U.S. law in

order to be issued visas. Processing of

applications and issuance of diversity

visas to successful applicants and their

eligible family members MUST occur by

September 30, 2000. Family members

may not obtain diversity visas to follow

to join the applicant in the U.S. after

this date.

IMPORTANT NOTICE: There is NO

initial fee, other than postage required

to enter the DV–2000 program. The use

of an outside intermediary or assistance

to prepare a DV–2000 entry is entirely

at the applicant’s discretion. Qualified

entries received directly from applicants

or through intermediaries have equal

chances of being selected by computer.

There is no advantage to mailing early,

or mailing from any particular locale.

Every application received during the

mail-in period will have an equal

random chance of being selected within

its region. However, more than one

application per person will disqualify

the person from registration.

Selection of Winners

The selection of winners is made at

random and no outside service can

legitimately improve an applicant’s

chances of being chosen or guarantee

that an entry will win. Any service that

claims it can improve an applicant’s

odds is promising something it cannot

lawfully deliver.

Persons who think they have been

cheated by a U.S. company or

consultant in connection with the

Diversity Visa Lottery may wish to

contact their local consumer affairs

office or the National Fraud Information

Center at 1–800–876–7060 or 1–202–

835–0159 from 9:00 am to 5:30 p.m.

(EST), Monday through Friday or 1–

202–835–0159; Internet address: http://

www/fraud.org. The U.S. Department of

State does not investigate consumer

complaints against businesses in the

United States.

Notifying Winners

Only successful entrants will be

notified. They will be notified by mail

between April and July of 1999 at the

address listed on their entry. Winners

will also be sent instructions on how to

apply for an immigrant visa, including

information on the fee for immigrant

visas and a separate visa lottery

surcharge. Successful entrants must

complete the immigrant visa application

process and meet all eligibility

requirements under U.S. law to be

issued a visa.

Being selected as a winner in the DV

Lottery does not automatically

guarantee being issued a visa even if the

applicant is qualified, because the

number of entries selected and

registered is greater than the number of

immigrant visas available. Those

selected will, therefore, need to

complete and file their immigrant visa

applications quickly. Once all 50,000

visas have been issued or on September

30, 1999, whichever is sooner, the DV

Program for Fiscal Year 2000 will end.

Obtaining Instructions on Entering the

DV Lottery

The above information on entering the

DV–2000 Program is also available 24

hours a day to persons within the

United States by calling the Department

of State’s Visa Lottery Information

Center at 1–900–884–8840 at a flat rate

of $5.10 per call. Callers will first hear

some basic information about the DV

Lottery and will be requested to provide

their name and address so that printed

instructions can be mailed to them.

Applicants overseas may continue to

contact the nearest U.S. Embassy or

Consulate for instructions on the DV

Lottery.

Dated: July 29, 1998.

Mary A. Ryan,

Assistant Secretary for Consular Affairs.

[FR Doc. 98–20637 Filed 7–31–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710–06–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. PE–98–15]

Petitions for Exemption; Summary of

Petitions Received; Disposition 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 partitions

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 August 24, 1998.

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: 9–NPRM–CMTS@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:

Tawana Matthews (202) 267–9783 or

Terry Stubblefield (202) 267–7624,

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 July 27,

1998.

Donald P. Byrne,

Assistant Chief Counsel for Regulations.

Petitions for Exemption

Docket No.: 28672

Petitioner: Alaska Airlines, Inc.

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

121.709(b)(3)

Description of Relief Sought: To permit

Alaska Airlines’ certificated

mechanics to train flight operations

instructors who would then train

flight crewmembers in the installation

and removal procedures for medevac

stretchers in Alaska Airlines’ aircraft

Docket No.: 29210

Petitioner: Simulator Training, Inc.

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

63.37(b)(1), (2), (3), (4), and (6) and

paragraphs (a)(3)(i), (iv)(a) and (v) of

appendix C to part 63

Description of Relief Sought: To permit

Simulator Training, Inc., to allow an

applicant for the initial Federal

Aviation Administration (FAA) flight

engineer (FE) certificate, who does not
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 148 / Monday, August 3, 1998 / Notices 41319

hold an FAA commercial pilot

certificate with an instrument rating,

to satisfy the FE certificate in-flight

aeronautical experience requirement

by completing a structured FAAapproved line-oriented observation

program (LOOP) in lieu of the flight

instruction time required in an

airplane. The LOOP would be

conducted only following an FE

applicant’s successful completion of

flight simulator, flight training device,

and line-oriented flight training

Docket No.: 29250

Petitioner: True North, Inc.

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

135.299(a)

Description of Relief Sought: To permit

True North, Inc., pilots to accomplish

a line operational evaluation in a

Level C or Level D flight simulator in

lieu of a line check in an aircraft

Docket No.: 29274

Petitioner: Airborne Inc.

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

135.299(a)

Description of Relief Sought: To permit

Airborne, Inc., pilots to accomplish a

line operational evaluation in a Level

C or Level D flight simulator in lieu

of a line check in an aircraft

Docket No.: 29233

Petitioner: Elite Aviation, Inc.

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

135.299(a)

Description of Relief Sought: To permit

Elite Aviation Inc., pilots to

accomplish a line operational

evaluation in a Level C or Level D

flight simulator in lieu of a line check

in an aircraft

Docket No.: 29276

Petitioner: Excelaire Services, Inc.

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

135.299(a)

Description of Relief Sought: To permit

Excelaire Services, Inc., pilots to

accomplish a line operational

evaluation in a Level C or Level D

flight simulator in lieu of a line check

in an aircraft

Docket No.: 29251

Petitioner: Alamo Jet, Inc.

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

135.299(a)

Description of Relief Sought: To permit

Alamo Jet, Inc., pilots to accomplish

a line operational evaluation in a

Level C or Level D flight simulator in

lieu of a line check in an aircraft

Docket No.: 29273

Petitioner: Air Response, Inc.

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

135.299(a)

Description of Relief Sought: To permit

Air Response, Inc., pilots to

accomplish a line operational

evaluation in a Level C or Level D

flight simulator in lieu of a line check

in an aircraft

Docket No.: 22690

Petitioner: The Boeing Company

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

61.57(c)(3)(ii) and (d)(2)(ii)

Description of Relief Sought: To permit

Boeing and pilots employed as

crewmenbers for Boeing to continue

to use any type of Boeing airplane or

a Level B, C, or D simulator to meet

the takeoff and landing regency of

experience requirements of § 61.57

Dispositions of Petitions

Docket No.: 581

Petitioner: Department of the Air Force

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

91.159

Description of Relief Sought/

Disposition: To permit the Air Force

to conduct hurricane reconnaissance

flights without maintaining the

appropriate cruising altitudes as

prescribed by the Federal Aviation

Regulations governing operations for

flights conducted under visual flight

rules. GRANT, July 13, 1998,

Exemption No. 131H

Docket No.: 29237

Petitioner: Mr. Ernest Maresca

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

121.383

Description of Relief Sought/

Disposition: To permit the petitioner

to act as a pilot in operations

conducted under part 121 after

reaching his 60th birthday. DENIAL,

July 9, 19998, Exemption No. 6797

Docket No.: 29182

Petitioner: Continental Express

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

121.434 (c)(1)(ii)

Description of Relief Sought/

Dispositions: To permit Continental

Express to substitute a qualified and

authorized check airman in place of

an FAA inspector to observe a

qualifying PIC while the PIC is

performing prescribed duties during

at least one flight that includes a

takeoff and a landing when

completing initial or upgrade training

as specified in § 121.424, subject to

certain conditions and limitations.

GRANT, July 16, 1998, Exemption No.

6798

Docket No.: 29172

Petitioner: Heli-Jet Corporation

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

135.152(a)

Description of Relief Sought/

Disposition: To permit Heli-Jet to

operate its five Bell 212 helicopters

under part 135 without each of those

helicopters being equipped with an

approved DFDR installed, subject to

certain conditions and limitations.

GRANT, July 2, 1998, Exemption No.

6796

Docket No.: 28975

Petitioner: AOG, Inc.

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

145.37 (b)

Description of Relief Sought/

Disposition: To permit AOG, Inc., to

perform maintenance on flexible and

integral fuel cells at its customer’s

facilities and maintenance on flexible

fuel cells at the petitioner’s facility

without providing suitable permanent

housing for at least one of the heaviest

aircraft for which it is rated. DENIAL

June 11, 1998, Exemption No. 6795

Docket No.: 29211

Petitioner: United Parcel Service

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

61.157 and 61.158

Description of Relief Sought/

Disposition: To permit UPS and

persons who contract for services

from UPS to use FAA-approved flight

simulators to meet certain flight

experience requirements of part 61

without UPS holding a 14 CFR part

142 certificate. GRANT, July 10, 1998,

Exemption No. 6794

Docket No.: 26582

Petitioner: Air Transport Association of

America

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

61.3(a) and (c), 63.3(a), and

121.383(a)(2)

Description of Relief Sought/

Disposition: To permit an air carrier to

issue written confirmation of an FAAissued crewmember certificate to a

flight crewmember employed by that

air carrier based on information in the

air carrier’s approved record system.

GRANT, July 10, 1998, Exemption No.

5487C

Docket No.: 27354

Petitioner: Mr. August J. Blake, Inc.

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

137.53(c)(2)

Description of Relief Sought/

Disposition: To permit the petitioner

to conduct aerial application of

insecticide materials from a Piper PA–

23–250 aircraft not equipped with a

device capable of jettisoning within

45 seconds at least one-half of the

aircraft’s maximum authorized load of

agricultural materials when operating

over a congested area. GRANT, July

17, 1998, Exemption No. 5676C

Docket No.: 29263

Petitioner: Mr. Edward E. Moon

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

121.383(c)

Description of Relief Sought/

Disposition: To permit the petitioner

to act as a pilot in operations

conducted under part 121 after
41320 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 148 / Monday, August 3, 1998 / Notices

reaching his 60th birthday. DENIAL,

July 22, 1998, Exemption No. 6799

Docket No.: 144CE

Petitioner: Sino Swearingen Aircraft

Company

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

23.25; 23.29; 23.235; 23.471; 23.473;

23.477; 23.479; 23.481; 23.483;

23.485; 23.493; 23.499; 23.723;

23.725; 23.726; 23.727; 23.959;

23.1583(c) (1) and (2), Appendix

C23.1, Appendix D23.1, through

Amendment 23–52

Description of Relief Sought/

Disposition: To allow type

certification of the Sino Swearingen

SJ30–2 390 airplane without an exact

showing of compliance 14 CFR part

23 requirements, subject to certain

conditions and limitations. GRANT,

June 29, 1998, Exemption No. 6791

Docket No.: 29041

Petitioner: Estumkeda, Ltd

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

47.65

Description of Relief Sought/

Disposition: To permit the petitioner

to obtain a Dealer’s Aircraft

Registration Certificate without

meeting the United States citizenship

requirements. DENIAL, June 23, 1998,

Exemption No. 6793

[FR Doc. 98–20632 Filed 7–31–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

RTCA, Inc., Government/Industry Free

Flight Steering Committee

Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the

Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub.

L. 92–463, 5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice

is hereby given for an RTCA

Government/Industry Free Flight

Steering Committee meeting to be held

August 19, 1998, starting at 1:00 p.m.

The meeting will be held at the Federal

Aviation Administration, 800

Independence Avenue, SW.,

Washington, DC, 20591, in the Bessie

Coleman Conference Center, Room 2AB.

The agenda will include: (1) Welcome

and Opening Remarks; (2) Review

Summary of the Previous Meeting; (3)

Report and Recommendations from the

Free Flight Select Committee on a

Restructured Flight 2000 Program; (4)

Report on the status and plans for the

GPS/WAAS Sole Means Risk

Assessment; (5) Other Business; (6) Date

and Location of Next Meeting; (7)

Closing Remarks.

Attendance is open to the interested

public but limited to space availability.

With the approval of the co-chairmen,

members of the public may present oral

statements at the meeting. Persons

wishing to present statements or obtain

information should contact the RTCA,

Inc., at (202) 833–9339 (phone), (202)

833–9434 (facsimile), or

dclarke@rtca.org (e-mail). Members of

the public may present a written

statement at any time.

Issued in Washington, DC, on July 27,

1998.

Janice L. Peters,

Designated Official.

[FR Doc. 98–20631 Filed 7–31–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA 98–4075]

General Motors; Grant of Application

for Decision of Inconsequential

Noncompliance

General Motors Corporation (GM) of

Warren, Michigan, determined that

some of its 1997 model Chevrolet

Corvettes failed to meet the

requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle

Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 124,

‘‘Accelerator Control Systems,’’ and

filed an appropriate report pursuant to

49 CFR Part 573, ‘‘Defects and

Noncompliance Reports.’’ GM also

applied to be exempted from the

notification and remedy requirements of

49 U.S.C. Chapter 301—‘‘Motor Vehicle

Safety’’ on the basis that the

noncompliance is inconsequential to

motor vehicle safety.

Notice of receipt of the application

was published on September 16, 1997,

and an opportunity afforded for

comment (Docket No. 97–58, Notice 1;

62 FR 48708).

Paragraph S5.2 of FMVSS No. 124

requires the throttle to return to idle

position within the time limits specified

in S5.3, whenever any component of the

accelerator control system is

disconnected or severed at a single

point. S5.3 requires return to idle within

3 seconds for any vehicle exposed to

temperatures of 0 degrees to ¥40

degrees F (¥18 degrees to ¥40 degrees

C). During the 1997 model year, GM

produced 9,500 Chevrolet Corvettes,

which will not comply with FMVSS No.

124 because, when tested with one

return spring removed at temperatures

below ¥26 degrees F, their accelerator

pedal module assembly does not move

quickly enough to cause the throttle to

return to the idle position within 3

seconds.

GM described the noncompliance and

supported its application with the

following arguments:

The Chevrolet Corvette employs an

electronic throttle control which adjusts

the throttle position based on input

from the accelerator pedal position. The

accelerator pedal is equipped with three

springs, any two of which are capable of

returning the pedal to rest position.

Once this occurs, the throttle returns to

idle position approximately 0.2 seconds

later. A test run in early May, however,

raised a question about the ability of the

pedal assembly to return at low

temperatures.

GM believes that the failure of the

pedal assembly to meet the throttle

closing time requirements of FMVSS

No. 124 at extremely low temperatures

is inconsequential to motor vehicle

safety for the following reasons.

1. Vehicle Controllability—In the

unlikely event that all of the

prerequisites necessary for the

noncompliance occurred—that is, a

return spring was disconnected or

severed on a pedal assembly with

residual oil, and the vehicle soaked at

ambient temperatures below ¥32

degrees C—the vehicle would continue

to be controllable both by the service

brakes and as a result of the Brake

Torque Management System.

2. Reliability of the Accelerator

Springs—The condition which is the

subject of GM’s noncompliance decision

can only occur if one of the return

springs is severed or disconnected. The

springs in the Corvette pedal assembly,

however, have extremely high reliability

and are not likely to fail in the real

world.

3. Condition Requires Extreme

Temperatures; Pedal Assembly Warms

Quickly—As mentioned above, the root

cause of the noncompliance condition is

the residual oil on the pedal assemblies

congealing below ¥32 degrees C.

Testing at temperatures above that level

resulted in full compliance with the

FMVSS No. 124 time limits for all pedal

assemblies tested. Therefore, the

ambient temperatures required for the

possibility of this noncompliance to

exist are severe. Even if a vehicle with

a disconnected return spring soaked

under the necessary harsh conditions

for a sufficient time to congeal the

residual oil, the potential for the

noncompliance to occur would exist for

only a short time, because the pedal

assembly would warm up quickly with

activation of the vehicle heating system.

4. Condition is Self-correcting—

Durability testing indicates that the

condition improves with wear. Bench

testing was conducted on five

production pedal assemblies with poor