20514 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 78 / Monday, April 23, 2001 / Notices

(NRHP). Additionally, FIR (WLM–212)

is a National Historic Landmark listed

on the NRHP. The USCG intends to

replace the 180-foot WLBs with 175-foot

Coastal Buoy Tenders (WLMs) and 225-

foot Coastal Buoy Tenders (WLBs).

These new vessels will support the

same mission requirements as the 180-

foot WLBs, with state-of-the-art

technology.

While the 180-foot WLBs have

contributed to nearly every USCG

mission area, their primary contribution

has been servicing the Short Range Aids

to Navigation System. All 180-foot

WLBs are over 50 years of age and

further renovation is impractical.

Excessive maintenance problems

stemming from the age of these vessels

are also being experienced with

resultant reduced reliability and

increased operating costs. The Federal

Property Administrative Services Act

(FPASA) (40 U.S.C. Chapter 10) requires

that excess property be identified and

declared as such. Therefore, the USCG

has an operational, economic, and legal

need to cost-effectively rid itself of

obsolete and inefficient vessels that can

no longer effectively carry out the USCG

missions they were designed for.

Consequently, the USCG is proposing to

decommission (remove the vessels from

active use) and declare the current WLB

fleet excess to its needs. In order to

declare a vessel excess, the USCG must

complete a report of survey that states

that the vessel is excess to its needs. The

USCG provides the General Services

Administration (GSA) with a Standard

Form 120 for the excess material.

Following submittal to GSA, the

standard mandated GSA process for

disposing of Federally owned materials

ensues. Built in 1939, FIR (WLM 212) is

classified as a National Historic

Landmark and as such is listed on the

NRHP. Homeported for 50 years in

Washington State, FIR served buoys,

lighthouses, and other navigation aids

in the Pacific Northwest. FIR is the last

surviving unaltered American

lighthouse tender, and was the last

working member of the U.S. Lighthouse

Service fleet.

The FIR has reached the end of its

service life. The vessel is over 50 years

of age. Excessive maintenance problems

stemming from the age of FIR were

experienced with resultant reduced

reliability and increased operating costs.

As a result of its age and condition, the

USCG decommissioned FIR in 1996. At

present, the USCG is incurring costs to

store the vessel in Suisun Bay,

California. As previously stated, it is a

requirement of the FPASA that excess

property be identified by the USCG and

declared as such. Therefore, the USCG

has an operational, economic, and legal

need to cost effectively rid itself of the

obsolete and inefficient FIR.

Draft Programmatic Environmental

Assessment

The Coast Guard has prepared a draft

Programmatic Environmental

Assessment (PEA). The draft PEA

identifies and examines the reasonable

alternatives to our proposed action and

assesses potential environmental

impacts. The alternatives analyzed in

this PEA were chosen because they

fulfilled the need for the USCG to cost

effectively and legally rid itself of

obsolete and inefficient vessels that can

no longer effectively carry out the USCG

missions they were designed for.

However, the choice of alternatives is

limited due to legal mandates requiring

a specific excessing and disposal

process to be used by the USCG. Certain

legal mandates require a specific

prioritized process for vessel (personal

property) disposal, the majority of

which is not controlled by the USCG. In

analyzing these alternatives for

environmental impact, the PEA looks at

the impacts of decommissioning and

excessing which we control, and then,

generally, at the possible environmental

impacts resulting from each component

of the mandated disposal process—the

connected actions to the

decommissioning and/or excessing of

our remaining 180-foot vessels and FIR.

This is a programmatic document and

cannot foresee all possible site specific

and cumulative impacts from the

connected actions (largely not under

USCG control) to our proposed

decommissioning and excessing.

Comments on environmental

concerns related to the PEA are

encouraged. All comments will be

considered in preparing the final PEA.

Dated: April 13, 2001.

Terry M. Cross,

Assistant Commandant for Operations.

[FR Doc. 01–9993 Filed 4–20–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. PE–2001–32]

Petitions for Exemption; Summary of

Dispositions of Petitions Issued

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of dispositions of prior

petitions.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to FAA’s rulemaking

provisions governing the application,

processing, and disposition of petitions

for exemption part 11 of Title 14, Code

of Federal Regulations (14 CFR), this

notice contains a summary of certain

dispositions of certain petitions

previously received. 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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Forest Rawls (202) 267–8033, Sandy

Buchanan-Sumter (202) 267–7271, or

Vanessa Wilkins (202) 267–8029 Office

of Rulemaking (ARM–1), Federal

Aviation Administration, 800

Independence Avenue, SW.,

Washington, DC 20591.

This notice is published pursuant to

§§ 11.85 and 11.91.

Issued in Washington, D.C., on April 18,

2001.

Gary A. Michel,

Acting Assistant Chief Counsel for

Regulations.

Dispositions of Petitions

Docket No.: FAA–2000–8391.

Petitioner: Ed’s Flying Service, Inc.

Section of the 14 CFR Affected: 14

CFR 135.143(c)(2).

Description of Relief Sought/

Disposition: To permit EFS to operate

certain aircraft under part 135 without

a TSO–C112 (Mode S) transponder

installed in the aircraft. Grant, 04/11/

2001, Exemption No. 7494.

Docket No.: FAA–2000–8271.

Petitioner: East Air, Inc.

Section of the 14 CFR Affected: 14

CFR 135.143(c)(2).

Description of Relief Sought/

Disposition: To permit East Air, Inc., to

operate certain aircraft under part 135

without a TSO–C112 (Mode S)

transponder installed in the aircraft.

Grant, 04/10/2001, Exemption No. 7493.

Docket No.: FAA–2000–8486.

Petitioner: Hyannis Air Service, Inc.

dba Cape Air/Nantucket Airlines.

Section of the 14 CFR Affected: 14

CFR 135.143(c)(2).

Description of Relief Sought/

Disposition: To permit HAS to operate

certain aircraft under part 135 without

a TSO–C112 (Mode S) transponder

installed in the aircraft. Grant, 04/10/

2001, Exemption No. 7492.

Docket No.: FAA–2000–8527.

Petitioner: Pan Am International

Flight Academy, Inc.

Section of the 14 CFR Affected: 14

CFR 91.9(a) and 91.531(a)(1) and (2).

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 78 / Monday, April 23, 2001 / Notices 20515

Description of Relief Sought/

Disposition: To permit Pan Am and

operators of Cessna Citation Model 550,

S550, 552, or 560 airplanes to operate

those airplanes without a pilot who is

designated as second in command.

Grant, 04/06/2001, Exemption No. 7487.

Docket No.: FAA–2001–8744

(formerly Docket No. 28858).

Petitioner: Evergreen Air Venture

Museum.

Section of the 14 CFR Affected: 14

CFR 91.315, 119.5(g), and 119.21(a).

Description of Relief Sought/

Disposition: To permit EAVM to operate

its former military Boeing B–17G

aircraft, which has a limited category

airworthiness certificate, for the purpose

of carrying passengers on local flights in

return for donations. Grant, 04/10/2001,

Exemption No. 6632B.

Docket No.: FAA–2000–8154.

Petitioner: Grand Holdings, Inc. dba

Champion Air.

Section of the 14 CFR Affected: 14

CFR 121.623(a) and (d), 121.643, and

121.645(e).

Description of Relief Sought/

Disposition: To permit Champion Air to

conduct its supplemental operations

within the 48 contiguous United States

and the District of Columbia using the

flight regulations for alternate airports

as required by § 121.619 and fuel

reserve requirements as required by

§ 121.639 that are applicable to

domestic operations. Grant, 04/10/2001,

Exemption No. 7490.

Docket No.: FAA–2000–7991.

Petitioner: American Trans Air, Inc.

Section of the 14 CFR Affected: 14

CFR 121.434(c)(1)(ii).

Description of Relief Sought/

Disposition: To allow ATA to substitute

a qualified and authorized check airman

in place of an FAA inspector to observe

a qualifying pilot in command while

that PIC is performing prescribed duties

during at least one flight leg that

includes a takeoff and a landing when

completing initial or upgrade training as

specified in § 121.424. Grant, 04/10/

2001, Exemption No. 7491.

Docket No.: FAA–2000–8151

(formerly Docket No. 28649).

Petitioner: Rolls-Royce Brasil, Ltda.

Section of the 14 CFR Affected: 14

CFR 145.47(b).

Description of Relief Sought/

Disposition: To allow Rolls-Royce to use

Institute National de Metrology,

Normaliza ̃o e Qualidade Industrial,

Brazil’s national standards organization,

rather than the calibration standards of

the U.S. National Institute of Standards

and Technology to test its inspection

and test equipment. Grant, 04/06/2001,

Exemption No. 7483.

Docket No.: FAA–2000–8426

(formerly Docket No. 25988).

Petitioner: Soloy Corporation.

Section of the 14 CFR Affected: 14

CFR 21.19(b)(1).

Description of Relief Sought/

Disposition: To permit Soloy to apply

for a supplemental type certificate (STC)

for a design change that would convert

the Cessna Caravan from a one-engine

aircraft to a two-engine aircraft using the

STC process. Grant, 04/06/2001,

Exemption No. 6888A.

Docket No.: FAA–2001–9141.

Petitioner: Business Aviation Courier.

Section of the 14 CFR Affected: 14

CFR 135.143(c)(2).

Description of Relief Sought/

Disposition: To permit BAV to operate

certain aircraft under part 135 without

a TSO–C112 (Mode S) transponder

installed in the aircraft. Grant, 04/09/

2001, Exemption No. 7488.

Docket No.: FAA–2000–8062.

Petitioner: The Boeing Company.

Section of the 14 CFR Affected: 14

CFR 25.961(a)(5).

Description of Relief Sought/

Disposition: To permit Boeing to use a

maximum temperature limitation of

80°F for JP–4 and Jet B fuels on the

Boeing Model 747–400/–400F/RB11–

524G–T/H–T airplane. Grant, 04/12/

2001, Exemption No. 7496.

[FR Doc. 01–10001 Filed 4–20–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Intent To Rule on Application

To Impose and Use the Revenue From

a Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) at

Pago Pago International Airport, Pago

Pago, American Samoa

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 the

revenue from a PFC at Pago Pago

International Airport under the

provisions of the Aviation Safety and

Capacity Expansion Act of 1990 (Title

IX of the Omnibus Budget

Reconciliation Act of 1990) (Pub. L.

101–508) and part 158 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 158).

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before May 23, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Comments on this

application may be mailed or delivered

in triplicate to the FAA at the following

address: Federal Aviation

Administration, Airports Division,

15000 Aviation Blvd., Room 3024,

Lawndale, CA 90261, or Honolulu

Airports District Office, Federal

Building, 300 Ala Moana Blvd., Room

7–128, Honolulu, HI, 96813. In addition,

one copy of any comments submitted to

the FAA must be mailed or delivered to

Mr. Abe Malae, Director, Department of

Port Administration, American Samoa

Government, at the following address:

P.O. Box 639, Pago Pago, American

Samoa, 96799. Air carriers and foreign

air carriers may submit copies of written

comments previously provided to the

Department of Port Administration,

American Samoa Government under

section 158.23 of part 158.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Steven Wong, Project Engineer,

Honolulu Airports District Office, 300

Ala Moana Blvd., Room 7–128,

Honolulu, HI, 96813, Telephone: (808)

541–1225. 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 to impose

and use the revenue from a PFC at Pago

Pago International Airport under the

provisions of the Aviation Safety and

Capacity Expansion Act of 1990 (Title

IX of the Omnibus Budget

Reconciliation Act of 1990) (Pub. L.

101–508) and part 158 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 158).

On March 28, 2001, the FAA

determined that the application to

impose and use the revenue from a PFC

submitted by the American Samoa

Government 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 June

28, 2001.

The following is a brief overview of

the impose and use application number

01–02–C–00–PPG:

Level of proposed PFC: $4.50.

Charge effective date: September 1,

2001.

Proposed charge expiration date: June

1, 2003.

Total estimated PFC revenue:

$765,000.

Brief description of the proposed

project: Terminal Improvements.

Class or classes of air carriers which

the public agency has requested not be

required to collect PFCs: None.

Any person may inspect the

application in person at the FAA office

listed above under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT and at the FAA