14838 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 61 / Wednesday, April 1, 2009 / Notices 

3Article 22, para. 2 also allows the passenger to 

declare excess value for baggage, subject to payment 

of a supplementary fee if the carrier so requires. 

Some tariff provisions state that the higher declared 

value shall not apply to a list of valuable articles 

including ‘‘money, jewelry, silverware, negotiable 

papers, securities, business documents, samples, 

paintings * * *.’’ Such rules are also inconsistent 

with the Convention. 

4Similar language occurs in numerous other 

approvals of code-share services. 

Convention, up to the limit of 1000 

SDRs (Convention, Article 22, para. 2.).3

Carriers should review their filed tariffs 

on this matter and modify their tariffs 

and their baggage claim policies, if 

necessary, to conform to the terms of the 

Convention. In addition, carriers should 

ensure that their websites do not 

contain improper information regarding 

baggage liability exclusions applicable 

to international service. 

A second issue of concern stems from 

airline tariffs related to code-share 

service. As a condition for approval of 

international code-share services, the 

Department has as a matter of policy 

required that ‘‘the carrier selling such 

transportation (i.e., the carrier shown on 

the ticket) accept responsibility for the 

entirety of the code-share journey for all 

obligations established in the contract of 

carriage with the passenger; and that the 

passenger liability of the operating 

carrier be unaffected.’’ (Order 2008–5– 

19, OST–2008–0064).4 Notwithstanding 

this clear language, several carriers have 

filed tariff provisions that purport to 

apply the terms and conditions of the 

operating carrier’s contract of carriage 

generally, or in certain areas such as 

check-in time limits, unaccompanied 

minors, carriage of animals, refusal to 

transport, oxygen service, irregular 

operations, denied boarding 

compensation, and baggage acceptance, 

allowance and liability. Others state that 

passengers on code-share flights ‘‘may 

be subject’’ to the operating carrier’s 

baggage charges. A number of carriers 

have no clear tariff rule on the subject. 

The intent of this DOT code-share 

approval provision may not be 

circumvented by tariff provisions 

attempting to allocate responsibility and 

contract of carriage provisions in 

different ways by the carriers involved, 

or by silence on the subject. As with the 

exclusionary provisions cited above, 

carriers should review their tariffs and 

practices and make revisions, if 

necessary, to reflect the conditions 

imposed in the Department’s orders 

approving code-share service. 

As a matter of policy, the Aviation 

Enforcement Office will consider the 

subject tariff provisions noted above 

involving exclusionary baggage 

provisions to be of no effect and in 

violation of the Convention and those 

involving code share relationships to be 

in violation of pertinent Department 

approvals of those code-share services. 

The tariffs and their application, and 

similar practices, in the view of the 

Aviation Enforcement Office, also 

constitute unfair or deceptive business 

practices and unfair methods of 

competition in violation of 49 U.S.C. 

41712. Carriers should, therefore, 

review their tariffs and practices with 

respect to these two areas and, if 

necessary, immediately modify their 

practices to conform to the Convention 

and Department code-share conditions 

and, within 90 days of this notice, revise 

their respective tariffs and modify 

appropriately the statements of their 

baggage and code-share policies on their 

Web sites. After that date, the Aviation 

Enforcement Office will pursue 

enforcement action in appropriate cases. 

This disclosure guidance, it should be 

noted, also extends to ticket agents. 

Questions regarding this notice may be 

addressed to the Office of Aviation 

Enforcement and Proceedings (C–70), 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey Ave., SE., Washington, DC 

20590. 

Dated: March 26, 2009. 

By: 

Samuel Podberesky, 

Assistant General Counsel for Aviation 

Enforcement and Proceedings. 

An electronic version of this 

document is available at http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

[FR Doc. E9–7264 Filed 3–31–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–9X–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Noise Exposure Map Notice; Receipt of 

Noise Compatibility Program and 

Request for Review; Kansas City 

International Airport, Kansas City, MO 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration, DOT. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) announces its 

determination that the noise exposure 

maps submitted by the Kansas City 

Aviation Department for the Kansas City 

International Airport under the 

provisions of 49 U.S.C. 47501 et seq. 

(Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement 

Act, herein after referred to as ‘‘the 

Act’’) and 14 Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) part 150 (hereinafter 

referred to as ‘‘Part 150’’) are in 

compliance with applicable 

requirements. The FAA also announces 

that it is reviewing a proposed noise 

compatibility program that was 

submitted for the Kansas City 

International Airport under Part 150 in 

conjunction with the noise exposure 

map, and that this program will be 

approved or disapproved on or before 

September 16, 2009. 

DATES: The effective date of the FAA’s 

determination on the noise exposure 

maps and of the start of its review of the 

associated noise compatibility program 

is March 20, 2009. The public comment 

period ends May 19, 2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

FAA, Todd Madison, ACE–61 1 F, 901 

Locust, Room 335, Kansas City, 

Missouri 64106–2325, 

todd.madison@faa.qov, 816–329–2640. 

Comments on the proposed noise 

compatibility program should also be 

submitted to the above office. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

notice announces the FAA finds that the 

noise exposure maps submitted for the 

Kansas City International Airport are in 

compliance with applicable 

requirements of Part 150, effective 

March 20, 2009. Further, FAA is 

reviewing a proposed noise 

compatibility program for that airport 

which will be approved or disapproved 

on or before September 16, 2009. This 

notice also announces the availability of 

this program for public review and 

comment. 

Under 49 U.S.C., section 47503 of the 

Act, an airport operator may submit to 

the FAA noise exposure maps which 

meet applicable regulations and which 

depict non-compatible land uses as of 

the date of submission of such maps, a 

description of projected aircraft 

operations, and the ways in which such 

operations will affect such maps. The 

Act requires such maps to be developed 

in consultation with interested and 

affected parties in the local community, 

government agencies, and persons using 

the airport. 

An airport operator who has 

submitted noise exposure maps that are 

found by FAA to be in compliance with 

the requirements of Part 150, 

promulgated pursuant to the Act, may 

submit a noise compatibility program 

for FAA approval which sets forth the 

measures the operator has taken or 

proposes to take to reduce existing noncompatible uses and prevent the 

introduction of additional noncompatible uses. 

The Kansas City Aviation Department 

submitted to the FAA on March 6, 2009, 

noise exposure maps, descriptions and 

other documentation that were 

produced during the ‘‘2008 Update to 14 

CFR Part 150 Noise Exposure Maps and 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 61 / Wednesday, April 1, 2009 / Notices 14839 

Noise Compatibility Program.’’ It was 

requested that the FAA review this 

material as the noise exposure maps, as 

described in section 47503 of the Act, 

and that the noise mitigation measures, 

to be implemented jointly by the airport 

and surrounding communities, be 

approved as a noise compatibility 

program under section 47504 of the Act. 

The FAA has completed its review of 

the noise exposure maps and related 

descriptions submitted by the Kansas 

City Aviation Department. The specific 

documentation determined to constitute 

the noise exposure maps includes: 

Current Noise Exposure Map (2008) as 

shown on Exhibit NEM–1, Future Noise 

Exposure Map/Noise Compatibility 

Program Map (2013) as shown on 

Exhibit NEM–2, and the associated 

supporting report, ‘‘2008 Update to 14 

CFR Part 150 Noise Exposure Maps and 

Noise Compatibility Program’’, which 

contains all other narrative, graphic, or 

tabular representations of the data as 

required by section Al 50.101 of Part 

150, and sections 47503 and 47506 of 

the Act. The FAA has determined that 

these maps for the Kansas City 

International Airport are in compliance 

with applicable requirements. This 

determination is effective on March 20, 

2009. 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, 

or constitute a commitment to approve 

a noise compatibility program or to fund 

the implementation of that program. 

If questions arise concerning the 

precise relationship of specific 

properties to noise exposure contours 

depicted on a noise exposure map 

submitted under section 47503 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 contours, or in interpreting the 

noise exposure maps to resolve 

questions concerning, for example, 

which properties should be covered by 

the provisions of section 47506 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 that submitted those 

maps, or with those public agencies and 

planning agencies with which 

consultation is required under section 

47503 of the Act. The FAA has relied on 

the certification by the airport operator, 

under section 150.21 of Part 150, that 

the statutorily required consultation has 

been accomplished. 

The FAA has formally received the 

noise compatibility program for the 

Kansas City International Airport, also 

effective on March 20, 2009. 

Preliminary review of the submitted 

material indicates that it conforms to the 

requirements for the submittal of noise 

compatibility programs, but that further 

review will be necessary prior to 

approval or disapproval of the program. 

The formal review period, limited by 

law to a maximum of 180 days, will be 

completed on or before September 16, 

2009. 

The FAA’s detailed evaluation will be 

conducted under the provisions of 

section 150.33 of Part 150. The primary 

considerations in the evaluation process 

are whether the proposed measures may 

reduce the level of aviation safety, 

create an undue burden on interstate or 

foreign commerce, or be reasonably 

consistent with obtaining the goal of 

reducing existing non compatible land 

uses and preventing the introduction of 

additional non-compatible land uses. 

Interested persons are invited to 

comment on the proposed program with 

specific reference to these factors. All 

relevant comments, other than those 

properly addressed to local land use 

authorities, will be considered by the 

FAA to the extent practicable. Copies of 

the noise exposure maps, the FAA’s 

evaluation of the maps, and the 

proposed noise compatibility program 

are available for examination at the 

following locations: 

Federal Aviation Administration, 

Central Region Airports Division, Room 

335, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 

64106–2325, from 7:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. 

Lapondzia Jones, Kansas City 

Aviation Department, Kansas City 

International Airport, 601 Brasilia 

Avenue, Kansas City, Missouri 64153– 

2054, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. 

Questions may be directed to the 

individual named above under the 

heading, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, March 20, 

2009. 

Jim A. Johnson, 

Manager, Central Region Airports Division. 

[FR Doc. E9–7000 Filed 3–31–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Highway Administration 

Notice of Final Federal Agency Actions 

on Proposed Highway in California 

AGENCY: Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of Limitation on Claims 

for Judicial Review of Actions by the 

California Department of Transportation 

(Caltrans), pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 327. 

SUMMARY: The FHWA, on behalf of 

Caltrans, is issuing this notice to 

announce actions taken by Caltrans and 

other Federal agencies that are final 

within the meaning of 23 U.S.C. 

139(l)(1). The actions relate to a 

proposed highway project, State Route 

76 (SR–76) from Melrose Drive in 

Oceanside to South Mission Avenue in 

Bonsall [KP 11.7/21.1 (PM 7.3/13.1)] in 

the county of San Diego, State of 

California. Those actions grant licenses, 

permits, and approvals for the project. 

DATES: By this notice, the FHWA, on 

behalf of Caltrans, is advising the public 

of final agency actions subject to 23 

U.S.C. 139(l)(1). A claim seeking 

judicial review of the Federal agency 

actions on the highway project will be 

barred unless the claim is filed on or 

before September 28, 2009. If the 

Federal law that authorizes judicial 

review of a claim provides a time period 

of less than 180 days for filing such 

claim, then the shorter time period still 

applies. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Susanne Glasgow, Deputy District 

Director, Division of Environmental 

Analysis, California Department of 

Transportation, 4050 Taylor Street, San 

Diego, CA 92110, Regular Office Hours 

8 a.m. to 5 p.m., Telephone number 

619–688–0100, e-mail 

Susanne.Glasgow@dot.ca.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Effective 

July 1, 2007, the FHWA assigned, and 

the California Department of 

Transportation (Caltrans) assumed, 

environmental responsibilities for this 

project pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 327. 

Notice is hereby given that Caltrans has 

taken final agency actions subject to 23 

U.S.C. 139(l)(1) by issuing licenses, 

permits, and approvals for the following 

highway project in the State of 

California: The project is located in 

northern San Diego County on SR–76 

from Melrose Drive in the City of 

Oceanside, to South Mission Road in 

the unincorporated community of 

Bonsall, covering a distance of 

approximately 9.4-kilometers (5.8- 

miles). The project would construct SR– 

76 as a four-lane conventional highway