Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2001 / Notices 31965

In Japan:

Mr. Hiroaki Tomita, Civil Aviation

Bureau of Japan (JCAB),

Airworthiness Division. 2–1–3

Kasumigaseki, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo,

100–8989, Japan, telephone: 813 3592

1362, fax: 813 3580 7963 e-mail:

tomita-h2ei@mlit.go.jp

In Europe:

Mr. Graham Greene, U.K. Civil Aviation

Authority, Safety Regulation Group,

Aviation House, Gatwick RH6 OYR,

United Kingdom, telephone: 44 1 293

573 462, fax: 44 1 293 573 981; e-mail:

graham.greene@srg.caa.co.uk

In Australia:

Mr. Bruce Byers, Specialist Engineer,

Crashworthiness, Civil Aviation

Safety Authority, Level 1 Novell

House, 71 Northbourne Ave, Canberra

ACT 2600 telephone: 61 2 62171866;

e-mail: BYERS B@casa.gov.au.

The following procedures are

established to facilitate the workings of

the conference.

• The conference will be open on a

space available basis to all persons

registered.

• A $240 fee will be charged for

attending the conference. This fee will

include lunch, as well as refreshments

during breaks each day, and one dinner.

• Following each presentation, or

series of presentations on a similar

topic, a brief question and answer

period may be allowed, and participants

will be given the opportunity for open

discussions, within the time available.

In addition, there will be separate

workshop sessions following some of

the technical sessions for more in depth

discussion.

• This conference is intended to

address fire and cabin safety research,

rather than regulatory, issues. As such,

statements made by Airworthiness

Authority participants at the conference

will not be taken as expressing final

Authority positions.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 5,

2001.

Ali Bahrami,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 01–14912 Filed 6–12–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Passenger Facility Charge

(PFC) Approvals and Disapprovals

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Monthly Notice of PFC

Approvals and Disapprovals. In April

2001, there were eight applications

approved. This notice also includes

information on one application,

approved in March 2001, inadvertently

left off the March 2001 notice.

Additionally, 29 approved amendments

to previously approved applications are

listed.

SUMMARY: The FAA publishes a monthly

notice, as appropriate, of PFC approvals

and disapprovals 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). This notice is published

pursuant to paragraph d of § 158.29.

PFC Application Approved

Public Agency: Dallas/Fort Worth

Airport Board, Dallas/Fort Worth,

Texas.

Application Number: 01–05–C–00–

DFW.

Application Type: Impose and use a

PFC.

PFC Level: $3.00.

Total PFC Revenue Approved in This

Decision: $1,681,378,893.

Earliest Charge Effective Date: April 1,

2001.

Estimated Charge Expiration Date:

December 1, 2013.

Class of Air Carriers Not Required to

Collect PFC’s: Part 135 air taxi/

commercial operators (charter

operators).

Determination: Approved. Based on

information submitted in the public

agency’s application, the FAA has

determined that the proposed class

accounts for less than 1 percent of the

total annual enplanements at Dallas/

Forth Worth International Airport.

Brief Description of Projects Approved

for Collection and Use:

Elevate service roads between terminals

C and D.

Install 12 precision approach path

indicators.

Upgrade 5W cargo road and crossunder.

Expand terminal B (international area).

Brief Description of Projects Approved

in Part for Collection and Use: Construct

automated people mover and associated

development.

Determination: Approved in part. The

operations, maintenance, and sotrage

facility is generally ineligible under

paragraphs 301 and 501, as well as

Appendix 2, of FAA Order 5100.38A,

Airport Improvement Program (AIP)

Handbook (October 24, 1989), with the

exception of the equipment needed to

provide operational control of the

‘‘opening day’’ system. Therefore, the

use of PFC revenue for the following

elements of the maintenance facility, at

a minimum, are not eligible: Spare parts

or spare equipment, any equipment

required to perform any maintenance,

whether that maintenance be on

vehicles, structural elements, operations

systems, or other components,

administrative offices, any build-up of

operational equipment in order to

accommodate future expansion of the

system; and the guideway and

associated infrastructure necessary to

access the maintenance facility.

Upgrade airport directional signage.

Determination: Partially approved.

The FAA has determined that the 86

percent of the planned signage is

eligible for PFC funding. The project

scope includes 20 signs adjacent to

State, Federal, or Interstate highways as

well as signs in revenue producing areas

which were determined to be ineligible

for PFC funding.

Brief Description of Disapproved

Project:

Construct 5W deicing ground service

equipment facility.

Determination: Disapproved. Storage

facilities for aircraft deicing equipment

and fluids are not AIP eligible under 49

U.S.C. 47102(3)(B)(v) or 47102(G).

Therefore, this project is not PFC

eligible under § 158.15(h)(1).

Brief Description of Projects

Withdrawn:

Upgrade airport-wide fueling system.

Widen 35L/35C aircraft rescue and

firefighting (ARFF) road.

Construct DPS service center.

Construct environmental material

handling facility.

Upgrade terminal circulation roads.

Acquire compressed natural gas buses.

Determination: These projects were

withdrawn by the public agency by

letter dated March 19, 2001. Therefore,

the FAA did not rule on these projects

in this decision.

Decision Date: March 29, 2001.

For Further Information Contact: G.

Thomas Wade, Southwest Region

Airports Division, (817) 222–5613.

Public Agency: Burbank-GlendalePasadena Airport Authority, Burbank,

California.

Application Number: 00–04–C–00–

BUR.

Application Type: Impose and use a

PFC.

PFC Level: $3.00.

Total PFC Revenue Approved in This

Decision: $73,699,087.

Earliest Charge Effective Date: June 1,

2010.

Estimated Charge Expiration Date:

April 1, 2021.

31966 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2001 / Notices

Class of Air Carriers Not Required to

Collect PFC’s: All air taxi/commercial

operators filing or required to file FAA

Form 1800–31.

Determination: Approved. Based on

information submitted in the public

agency’s application, the FAA has

determined that the proposed class

accounts for less than 1 percent of the

total annual enplanements at BurbankGlendale-Pasadena Airport.

Brief Description of Projects Approved

for Collection and Use:

Temporary ARFF station.

Modular ARFF station.

Gates B4 and B5 hardstand work.

ARFF equipment.

Gate B2 hardstand.

Airfield signage.

ARFF station ramp.

Sealcoat and stripe taxiways B and D.

Gate B5 paving.

Tie-in C–6 paving.

B ramp hardstand and striping.

Taxilane centerline lighting.

Restripe east ramp.

Intersection marking change.

Hardstand extension at gate A4.

East ramp hardstands.

Airfield distance remaining signs.

Aircraft holding pad, runway 15 center

reconstruction, airfield signage, and

taxiway lighting.

Taxiway B lights, airfield signage,

taxiway A, B, C, and taxilane

rehabilitation, and runway 8/26 blast

fence extension.

ARFF equipment.

Access controls.

Runway 33 rehabilitation.

Roadway signage.

Terminal road restriping.

Avenue B repairs.

Terminal entrance road repairs.

Noise monitoring equipment.

Part 150 update.

East concourse modifications.

1000 KV generator.

Modification to holdrooms 1, 2, 3, and

4.

Americans with Disabilities Act access.

Holdrooms 5, 6, and 7 modifications.

Terminal A baggage claim

modifications.

Building 10 seismic retrofit.

Terminal B restrooms.

Terminal B sewer.

Home acoustical treatment in original

Part 150 program.

Luther Burbank School acoustical

treatment.

Glenwood School acoustical treatment.

Mingay School acoustical treatment.

St. Patrick’s School acoustical

treatment.

Additional residences for acoustical

treatment.

Additional schools for acoustical

treatment.

Brief Description of Disapproved

Projects:

Arvilla Street and San Fernando Road

Improvements.

Determination: Disapproved. This

project is not eligible in accordance

with paragraph 553a of FAA Order

5100.38A, AIP Handbook (October 24,

1989). Therefore, this project does not

meet the requirements of § 158.15(b)(1).

Americans with Disabilities Act

(ADA) access.

Determination: Disapproved. The

proposed elevator serves exclusive

airport offices and leased airlines offices

only and does not aid in the movement

of passengers and baggage within the

airport. Therefore, in accordance with

Program Guidance Letter 93–3.5, this

project is not AIP eligible and does not

meet the requirements of § 158.15(b)(1).

Decision date: April 2, 2001.

For Further Information Contact:

Ruben Cabalbag, Western Pacific Region

Airports Division, (310) 725–3630.

Public Agency: State of Connecticut,

Department of Transportation, Bureau of

Aviation and Ports, Windsor Locks,

Connecticut.

Application Number: 01–13–U–00–

BDL.

Application Type: Use PFC revenue.

PFC Level: $3.00.

Total PFC Revenue to be Used in This

Decision: $4,400,000.

Charge Effective Date: November 1,

1999.

Estimated Charge Expiration Date:

June 1, 2000.

Class of Air Carriers Not Required to

Collect PFC’s: No charge from previous

decision.

Brief Description of Project Approved

for Use: 

Reconstruction of the east end of

taxiway S.

Decision Date: April 2, 2001.

For Further Information Contact:

Priscilla A. Scott, New England region

Airports Division, (781) 238–7614.

Public Agency: City of Eugene,

Oregon.

Application Number: 01–04–C–00–

EUG.

Application Type: Impose and use a

PFC.

PFC Level: $4.50.

Total PFC Revenue Approved in This

Decision: $3,155,267.

Earliest Charge Effective Date: June 1,

2001.

Estimated Charge Expiration Date:

June 1, 2003.

Classes of Air Carriers Not Required

to Collect PFC’s: 

(1) Operations by air taxi/commercial

operators utilizing aircraft having a

maximum seating capacity of less than

20 passengers when enplaning revenue

passengers in a limited, irregular/nonscheduled, or special service manner;

(2) operations by air taxi/commercial

operators, without regard to seating

capacity, for revenue passengers

transported for student instruction, nonstop sightseeing flights that begin and

end at Eugene Airport, Mahlon Sweet

Field and are conducted within a 25-

mile radius of the same airport,

firefighting charters, ferry or training

flights, air ambulance/medivac flights,

and aerial photography or survey flights.

Determination: Approved. Based on

information submitted in the public

agency’s application, the FAA has

determined that each proposed class

accounts for less than 1 percent of the

total annual enplanements at Eugene

Airport, Mahlon Sweet Field.

Brief Description of Projects Approved

for Collection and Use: 

Runway 3/21 safety improvements.

Taxiway extension and ramp

construction.

Terminal improvements.

B gate south ramp reconstruction.

Ramp pavement rehabilitation.

Jet bridge acquisition.

Brief Description of Project

Withdrawn:

Land acquisition.

Determination: This project was

withdrawn by the public agency by

letter dated March 30, 2001. Therefore,

the FAA did not rule on this project in

this decision.

Decision Date: April 5, 2001.

For Further Information Contact:

Suzanne Lee-Pang, Seattle Airports

District Office, (425) 227–2654.

Public Agency: City of Chicago,

Department of Aviation, Chicago,

Illinois.

Application Number: 01–12–C–00–

ORD.

Application Type: Impose and use a

PFC.

PFC Level: $4.50.

Total PFC Revenue Approved in This

Decision: $1,486,284,358.

Earliest Charge Effective Date: May 1,

2008.

Estimated Charge Expiration Date:

April 1, 2016.

Class of Air Carriers not Required to

Collect PFC’s: Air taxi.

Determination: Approved. Based on

information submitted in the public

agency’s application, the FAA has

determined that the proposed class

accounts for less than 1 percent of the

total annual enplanements at Chicago

O’Hare International Airport (ORD).

Brief Description of Projects Approved

for Collection at ORD and use at ORD

at a $4.50 PFC Level:

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2001 / Notices 31967

ARFF/simulator training facility.

Runway deicing fluid facility

improvements.

Runway weather sensors upgrade.

Service road to general aviation apron.

Land and hold short operations

improvements.

School insulation—1999–2001.

Residential insulation—2000.

Residential insulation—2001.

Shoulder rehabilitation—runways 4R/

22L and 9L/27R.

Cargo tunnel structural repairs.

Interactive computer training system.

Explosive blast mitigation—glass

coating.

Small basin storm water quality.

Runway 14R/32L rehabilitation.

Taxiway T extension rehabilitation.

Taxiway W rehabilitation.

General aviation pavement

rehabilitation.

Acquisition of 1998 security and fire

equipment.

Blast mitigation—phase II.

Lake O’Hare capacity enhancement.

Runway 9L/27R rehabilitation.

Perimeter intrusion detection system.

Taxiway B rehabilitation at Concourse

3/Concourse 5.

Snow dump improvements.

Runway 14L/32R rehabilitation.

Concourse F extension.

World Gateway Program formulation.

Brief Description of Projects Approved

in Part for Collection at ORD and use at

ORD at a $4.50 PFC Level:

Security checkpoint equipment.

Determination: Partially approved.

Explosive trace detection equipment has

already been deployed to each

checkpoint in sufficient number to meet

current FAA regulations and operating

procedures. Therefore, the explosive

trace detection equipment element of

this project is not approved.

Wetlands relocation.

Determination: Partially approved.

The environmental assessment in

support of this project included only the

detailed analysis for filling 6.3 acres of

wetlands in a portion of the runway

protection zone and for remediating

24.08 acres of wetlands located in the

southwest portion of ORD. The

remaining wetlands have not been

environmentally evaluated and thus the

public agency cannot meet the

requirement of § 158.25(c)(1)(ii)(B) for

the remaining wetlands and that portion

of the project is not approved.

Brief Description of Project Approved

for Collection at ORD and Use at

Chicago Midway Airport at a $4.50 PFC

Level:

Home soundproofing.

Brief Description of Projects Approved

for Collection at ORD for Future Use at

ORD at a $4.50 PFC Level:

Concourse K extension.

Taxiway A/B extension/oil separators

relocation.

Hardstand apron.

Terminal 6 development.

Terminal 1/Terminal 2 connection

expansion.

Concourse L extension.

Runway 18/36 rehabilitation.

Brief Description of Project Approved

in Part For Collection at ORD for Future

Use at ORD at a $4.50 PFC Level:

Airport Transit System (ATS)

maintenance relocation.

Determination: Partially approved.

This project meets the nominal

requirements for AIP eligibility and,

therefore, PFC eligibility under

paragraph 594(a) of FAA Order

5100.38A, AIP Handbook (October 24,

1989) which provides for the relocation

of a facility that impedes eligible

development. However, maintenance

facilities are eligible only in so far as

they provide maintenance for eligible

safety and security equipment per

paragraph 567(e)(1) of FAA Order

5100.38A. Therefore, the use of PFC

revenue is limited to the cost to replace

a like facility. Any expansion or

upgrade would not be PFC eligible.

Brief Description of Projects Approved

For Collection at ORD and Use at ORD

at a $3.00 PFC Level:

Terminal 1, Terminal 2, Terminal 3

facade and circulation enhancement

improvements.

Terminal 5 upper level roadway

rehabilitation.

ATS remote parking lot station.

Purchase two new ATS cars.

Military site acquisition formulation.

Soil erosion and sedimentation control.

Terminal 3 ATS bridge.

Terminal 1 elevator expansion.

Upper level roadway deck

rehabilitation.

ATS vehicles acquisition (3 cars).

ATS remote station escalator.

ATS MIRA computer replacement.

Bessie Coleman Drive rehabiliation—

phase II.

Equipment service platforms at Heating

and Refrigeration (H&R) plant.

H&R formulation.

Military site airside fencing.

ATS vehicles acquisition (12 cars).

Bessie Coleman bridge rehabilitation.

National Pollution Discharge

Elimination System permit

compliance.

Brief Description of Projects Approved

in Part for Collection at ORD and Use

at ORD at a $3.00 PFC Level:

Snow/security/fire miscellaneous

equipment.

Determination: partially approved.

This project included 11 components of

which four were determined to be

ineligible for AIP and, therefor, PFC

funding. The four disapproved

components and the reason for each

disapproval are: Four pickup truck

small salters (these units are not used on

runways, taxiways, aprons, or gate areas

as required in order to be eligible under

AIP criteria); one fire step van (this unit

is not required by Part 139 to meet

ARFF requirements); three ambulance

trucks (these units are not required by

Part 139 to meet ARFF requirements);

and two portable stairway trucks (these

units are not required by Part 139 to

meet ARFF requirements).

Oil separators 1, 2, and 3

rehabilitation.

Determination: Partially approved.

Any general maintenance, such as the

repair to lake erosion, is not AIP eligible

and, therefore, is not PFC eligible.

Concession area public space

buildout.

Determination: Partially approved.

The FAA has determined that a portion

of this project is for the benefit of the

food court and other revenue producing

vendors. Therefore, even though the

public agency identifies these areas as

public seating and for public use, the

FAA has concluded that the seating

areas proposed for the E/F apex, H/K

apex, and Rotunda are not AIP or PFC

eligible. However, in addition to the

seating areas, the public agency

proposes circulation improvements

intended to improve the efficiency of

passenger movements between and

among terminals and concourses as well

as provide access to restroom facilities.

The public agency estimates that the

circulation portion of the project has

been reduced by the final design of the

various areas to the point that the PFC

portion of the project is approximately

32 percent of the total. Furthermore, the

FAA’s analysis concluded that the

Concourse B food court does not

provide additional public circulation

and is primarily for the benefit of the

vendor area. Thus, the Concourse B area

is completely ineligible. In addition,

since the public agency listed the

Concourse H and K food courts

separately from the H/K apek, the FAA

assumes these are separate areas.

However, because the public agency did

not provide any plans, sketches, or

additional information regarding these

food courts, the FAA was unable to

determine if any portion of those areas

was eligible. Therefore, PFC funds

cannot be used to fund any

improvements in the H and K food

courts.

Airport maintenance complex

addition.

31968 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2001 / Notices

Determination: Partially approved.

This project is generally eligible under

AIP criteria, paragraphs 567(d) and 568

of FAA Order 5100.38A, AIP Handbook

(October 24, 1989). However, to the

extent a building houses both eligible

and ineligible equipment, the eligible

cost of the building and utilities for the

building must be a prorated share of the

total project cost, under paragraph 568

of FAA Order 5100.38A.

Landside formulation.

Determination: Partially approved.

Elements of work not specifically

identified in the public agency’s PFC

Attachment B’s for this project are not

included in this approval. Furthermore,

to the element that any of the elements

listed involve ineligible (off-airport)

work, the costs of planning, study,

assessment, and design attributable to

the off-airport portion of the project is

not PFC eligible.

High temperature water piping:

elimination of ball joints.

Determination: Partially approved.

This project is generally eligible under

AIP criteria, paragraph 568 of FAA

Order 5100.38A, AIP Handbook

(October 24, 1989). However, to the

extent the high temperature water

piping serves both eligible and

ineligible buildings and/or spaces, the

eligible cost of utilities for the airport

must be a prorated share of the total

project cost.

Brief Description of Projects Approved

for Collection at ORD and Use at Gary/

Chicago Airport (GYY) at a $3.00 PFC

Level:

Acquisition of a 1500-gallon ARFF

vehicle.

Terminal renovation—phase III.

Apron deicing facility.

East T-Hangar area site work.

Perimeter fencing.

Terminal renovations program.

Automated weather observation system.

General aviation apron overlay/

expansion.

Phase II airport master plan.

Terminal apron expansion.

Snow removal equipment.

Acquire 1500-gallon ARFF vehicle.

Terminal renovation—phase II.

Brief Description of Projects Approved

for Collection at ORD for Future Use at

ORD at a $3.00 PFC Level:

Relocated Northwest Tollway

connection

Balmoral Drive extension.

I–190 Collector/distributor.

ATS station at rental car campus.

ATS north extension.

Touch Avenue Reservoir.

Brief Description of Projects Approved

in Part for Collection at ORD for Future

Use at ORD at a $3.00 PFC Level:

Concourse C upgrade.

Determination: Partially approved.

Some elements of this project may meet

the nominal requirements for AIP

eligibility, and therefore, PFC eligibility

under paragraph 551 of FAA order

5100.38A, AIP Handbook (October 24,

1989). However, the FAA has

determined that the public agency did

not provide sufficient description or

justification concerning the majority of

the proposed elements to allow a

determination of nominal eligibility for

those elements. The FAA was able to

conclude that the restroom work, insofar

as this work is needed to comply with

ADA requirements, is eligible. The

information provided on the remaining

tasks in this project did not allow the

FAA to conclude that the remainder of

this project involved eligible

reconstruction/repair rather than

ineligible maintenance work (paragraph

501 of FAA Order 5100.38A).

Concourse B upgrade.

Determination: partially approved.

Some elements of this project may meet

the nominal requirements for AIP

eligibility, and, therefore, PFC eligibility

under paragraph 551 of FAA Order

5100.38A, AIP Handbook (October 24,

1989). However, the FAA has

determined that the public agency did

not provide sufficient description or

justification concerning the majority of

the proposed elements to allow a

determination of nominal eligibility for

those elements. The FAA was able to

conclude that the restroom work, insofar

as this work is needed to comply with

ADA requirements, in eligible. The

information provided on the remaining

tasks in this project did not allow the

FAA to conclude that the remainder of

this project involved eligible

reconstruction/repair rather than

ineligible maintenance work (paragraph

501 of FAA Order 5100.38A).

Concourse L upgrade.

Determination: Partially approved.

Some elements of this project may meet

the nominal requirements for AIP

eligibility, and therefore, PFC eligibility

under paragraph 551 of FAA Order

5100.38A, AIP Handbook (October 24,

1989). However, the FAA has

determined that the public agency did

not provide sufficient description or

justification concerning the majority of

the proposed elements to allow a

determination of nominal eligibility for

those elements. The FAA was able to

conclude that the restroom work, insofar

as this work is needed to comply with

ADA requirements, is eligible. The

information provided on the remaining

tasks in this project did not allow the

FAA to conclude that the remainder of

this project involved eligible

reconstruction/repair rather than

ineligible maintenance work (paragraph

501 of FAA Order 5100.38A).

Concourse K upgrade.

Determination: Partially approved.

Some elements of this project may meet

the nominal requirements for AIP

eligibility, and therefore, PFC eligibility

under paragraph 551 of FAA Order

5100.38A, AIP Handbook (October 24,

1989). However, the FAA has

determined that the public agency did

not provide sufficient description or

justification concerning the majority of

the proposed elements to allow a

determination of nominal eligibility for

those elements. The FAA was able to

conclude that the restroom work, insofar

as this work is needed to comply with

ADA requirements, is eligible. The

information provided on the remaining

tasks in this project did not allow the

FAA to conclude that the remainder of

this project involved eligible

reconstruction/repair rather than

ineligible maintenance work (paragraph

501 of FAA Order 5100.38A).

Concourse H upgrade.

Determination: Partially approved.

Some elements of this project may meet

the nominal requirements for AIP

eligibility, and therefore, PFC eligibility

under paragraph 551 of FAA Order

5100.38A, AIP Handbook (October 24,

1989). However, the FAA has

determined that the public agency did

not provide sufficient description or

justification concerning the majority of

the proposed elements to allow a

determination of nominal eligibility for

those elements. The FAA was able to

conclude that the restroom work, insofar

as this work is needed to comply with

ADA requirements, is eligible. The

information provided on the remaining

tasks in this project did not allow the

FAA to conclude that the remainder of

this project involved eligible

reconstruction/repair rather than

ineligible maintenance work (paragraph

501 of FAA Order 5100.38A).

New police facility.

Determination: Partially approved.

The FAA has determined that not all

activities at the Police Facility support

Part 107 functions. The Federal Security

Manager for ORD has determined that

approximately 80 percent of the facility

will support Part 107 activities and,

thus, this approval is limited to that 80

percent of the facility which is eligible.

Brief Description of Withdrawn

Project:

Airside perimeter road rehabilitation/

construction

Determination: this project was

withdrawn by the public agency by

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2001 / Notices 31969

letter dated January 4, 2001. Therefore,

the FAA did not rule on this project in

this decision.

Brief Description of Disapproved

Projects:

Automated vehicle identification—

ground transportation.

Determination: Disapproved. The

FAA has determined that this project

provides a system for controlling

commercial vehicles (taxis and

limousines) and charging them for the

Metropolitan Pier and Exposition

Authority commercial vehicle tax. The

FAA has determined that the collection

of a local vehicle tax does not preserve

or enhance capacity, safety, or security,

furnish opportunities for enhanced

competition between or among air

carriers, or mitigate noise impacts

resulting from aircraft operations at

ORD. Therefore, this project does not

meet the requirements of § 158.15(a).

Perimeter intrusion detection

system—phase II.

Determination: Disapproved. The

FAA’s Federal Security Manager for

ORD has reviewed the proposed project

and has determined that the existing 10-

foot fence with outriggers and barbed

wire, when combined with periodic

patrols, meets the requirements of part

107. Therefore, this project is not

required to meet part 107, does not meet

the requirements of § 158.15(b)(1), and

is not PFC eligible.

360 degree Silicon Graphics

Incorporated based tower simulator.

Determination: Disapproved. Training

programs for air traffic controllers are

not airport development as defined by

AIP criteria. In addition, the

development of new flight patterns or

procedures is not AIP eligible.

Therefore, this project does not meet the

requirements of § 158.15(b)(1).

Zemke road extension.

Determination: Disapproved. The

FAA has determined that the scope of

the project describes a roadway that will

be utilized for access to the soon-to-bebuilt United Airlines corporate

headquarters building, a nonaeronautical facility. As presently

depicted, this road does not exclusively

serve airport traffic as is required by

paragraph 553(a)(3) of FAA Order

5100.38A, AIP Handbook (October 24,

1989). therefore, this project does not

meet the requirements of § 158.15(b)(1).

Decision Date: April 16, 2001.

For Further Information Contact:

Thomas E. Salaman, Chicago Airports

District Office, (847) 294–7436.

Public Agency: City of San Jose,

California.

Application Number: 01–10–C–00–

SJC.

Application Type: Impose and use a

PFC.

PFC Level: $4.50.

Total PFC Revenue Approved in this

Decision: $93,956,000.

Earliest Charge Effective Date: January

1, 2005.

Estimated Charge Expiration Date:

January 1, 2009.

Class of Air Carriers Not Required to

Collect PFC’S: Air taxi/commercial

operators filing FAA Form 1800–31.

Determination: Approved. Based on

information submitted in the public

agency’s application, the FAA has

determined that the proposed class

accounts for less than 1 percent of the

total annual enplanements at San Jose

International Airport.

Brief Description of Projects Approved

for Collection and Use at a $4.50 PFC

Level:

Runway 30R reconstruction and

extension.

Noise attenuation within the Category II

and III eligibility areas.

Taxiway Y extension.

Decision Date: April 20, 2001.

For Further Information Contact:

Marlys Vandervelde, San Francisco

Airports District Office, (650) 876–2806.

Public Agency: Broward County

Aviation Department, Fort Lauderdale,

Florida.

Application Number: 01–04–C–00–

FLL.

Application Type: Impose and use a

PFC.

PFC Level: $3.00.

Total PFC Revenue Approved in this

Decision: $34,202,199.

Earliest Charge Effective Date: March

1, 2009.

Estimated Charge Expiration Date:

June 1, 2010.

Class of Air Carriers Not Required to

Collect PFC’S: Air taxi/commercial

operators filing FAA Form 1800–31.

Determination: Approved. Based on

information submitted in the public

agency’s application, the FAA has

determined that the proposed class

accounts for less than 1 percent of the

total annual enplanements at Fort

Lauderdale-Hollywood International

Airport.

Brief Description of Project Approved

for Use:

Aviation easements.

Brief Description of Projects Approved

for Collection and Use:

Common use terminal equipment.

Fiber optic backbone.

Concourse E, F, and H restrooms.

Pedestrian walkways.

Pedestrian canopies.

Curbside queuing lanes.

Commuter facility improvements.

Westside road relocation.

Inner terminal taxilanes—design.

Inner terminal taxilanes—construction.

Passenger loading bridge utilities

infrastructure.

Taxiway B extension.

Brief Description of Project Approved

in Part for Collection and Use:

Communications center equipment.

Determination: Partially approved.

The FAA has determined that

approximately 12.5 percent of the

project is eligible. Eligible portions

include the ARFF radio frequency, part

107 required security communications

equipment, and approximately 425

square feet of floor space that would be

utilized as the emergency operations

center. Ineligible portions of the facility

include areas and communications

equipment that support airport

operational functions not required by

parts 139 and 107.

Decision Date: April 23, 2001.

For Further Information Contact:

Susan Moore, Orlando Airports District

Office, (407) 812–6331, extension 20.

Public Agency: Jackson County,

Medford, Oregon.

Application Number: 01–06–C–00–

MFR.

Application Type: Impose and use a

PFC.

PFC Level: $4.50.

Total PFC Revenue Approved in This

Decision: $271,648.

Earliest Charge Effective Date:

February 1, 2003.

Estimated Charge Expiration Date:

June 1, 2003.

Class of Air Carriers Not Required To

Collect PFC’s: Operations by air taxi/

commercial operators when enplaning

revenue passengers in limited, irregular,

special service air taxi/commercial

operations such as air ambulance

services, student instruction, non-stop

sightseeing flights that begin and end at

the airport and are concluded within a

25-mile radius of the airport and other

similar limited, irregular, special service

operations by such air taxi/commercial

operators.

Determination: Approved. Based on

information submitted in the public

agency’s application, the FAA has

determined that the proposed class

accounts for less than 1 percent of the

total annual enplanements at Rogue

Valley International—Medford Airport.

Brief Description of Projects Approved

for Collection and Use:

Parallel taxiway extension.

High intensity runway lighting

replacement.

Decision Date: April 27, 2001.

31970 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2001 / Notices

For Further Information Contact:

Suzanne Lee-Pang, Seattle Airports

District Office, (425) 227–2654.

Public Agency: Salt Lake City

Corporation, Department of Airports,

Salt Lake City, Utah.

Application Number: 01–03–C–00–

SLC.

Application Type: Impose and use a

PFC.

PFC Level: $4.50.

Total PFC Revenue Approved in This

Decision: $27,852,072.

Earliest Charge Effective Date: July 1,

2001.

Estimated Charge Expiration Date:

May 2, 2002.

Class of Air Carriers Not Required To

Collect PFC’s: All air taxi/commercial

operators filing or required to file FAA

Form 1800–31.

Determination: Approved. Based on

information submitted in the public

agency’s application, the FAA has

determined that the proposed class

accounts for less than 1 percent of the

total annual enplanements at Salt Lake

City International Airport (SLC).

Brief Description of Projects Approved

for Collection at SLC and Use at SLC at

a $4.50 PFC Level:

Taxiway M (now H) reconstruction.

Cargo apron bypass.

South cargo apron expansion.

Taxiway S reconstruction.

Cargo site development and computer

access security system (CASS).

Airfield bird habitat management—

phase I.

Airfield bird habitat management—

phase II.

Airfield bird habitat management—

phase III.

Security access system (CASS).

CASS system expansion and upgrade.

Perimeter security fencing upgrade—

phase I.

Perimeter security fencing upgrade—

phase II.

Modify elevated runway guard lights,

and install precision approach path

indicators and runway end identifier

lights.

Automated exit land at screening

checkpoints.

Runway guard lights upgrade—phase II.

Deicing drainage improvements.

North cargo taxilane extension.

Taxiway H reconstruction—phase II.

Runway 16L pavement end and taxiway

H reconstruction.

Acquisition of 3.83 acres in the vicinity

of 2200 North.

Site preparation for new apron paving.

West apron paving and lighting—phase

I.

West apron drainage.

East apron drainage.

West apron paving—phase II.

Brief Description of Project Approved

in Part for Collection at SLC and Use at

SLC at a $4.50 PFC Level:

Closed circuit television system

modifications and upgrade.

Determination: Partially approved.

The FAA’s Civil Aviation Security Field

Office has determined that the cameras

proposed to be located in the rental car

facilities are not required to meet the

requirements of part 107. Therefore,

those cameras are not AIP or PFC

eligible.

Brief Description of Projects Approved

for Collection at SLC and Use at SLC at

a $3.00 PFC Level:

Airfield emergency access road and

snow storage.

Improve airport access road (2200

North) for capacity enhancement

program.

East apron overlay and reconstruction—

phase I.

Airfield lighting control system and

communications equipment

relocation.

East side deicing.

Fore station 11 relocation.

Constant current regulators and circuit

modifications.

Brief Description of Project Approved

in Part for Collection at SLC and Use at

SLC at a $3.00 PFC Level:

Electrical vault modifications.

Determination: Partially approved.

The second floor of the building, as

described by the public enemy, does not

contain eligible facilities and thus is not

eligible for PFC financing. The FAA

estimates the cost of the second floor to

be 50 percent of the total project cost.

Brief Description of Project Approved

for Collection at SLC and Use at Tooele

Valley Airport at a $3.00 PFC Level:

Wildlife fence.

Brief Description of Disapproved

Project: Category III and approach

lighting system with sequence

flashers—II, runway 16R (now runway

16L).

Determination: Disapproved. The

FAA has determined that if a notice to

proceed or start of physical construction

for a proposed PFC project occurred

prior to November 5, 1990 (the date the

PFC statute was enacted), the project is

not PFC eligible under § 158.3. This is

because implementation of a

construction project occurs when the

notice to proceed is issued or physical

construction is begun, whichever is

first. The notice to proceed for this

project was issued October 22, 1990.

Therefore, this project is not eligible to

receive PFC funding at any PFC level.

Decision Date: April 30, 2001.

For Further Information Contact:

Christopher J. Schaffer, Denver Airports

District Office, (303) 342–1258.

AMENDMENTS TO PFC APPROVALS

Amendment No. City, State

Amendment

Approved

Date

Original Approved Net PFC

Revenue

Amended Approved Net PFC

Revenue

Original Estimated

Charge Exp.

Date

Amended

Estimated

Charge Exp.

Date

94–01–C–04–FLL, Fort Lauderdale, FL .................................. 01/31/01 $52,777,754 $46,592,957 09/01/98 09/01/98

98–02–C–02–FLL, Fort Lauderdale, FL .................................. 01/31/01 $191,105,272 $183,627,920 11/01/07 01/01/07

92–01–C–08–SJC, San Jose, CA ........................................... 03/28/01 $71,744,826 $70,558,668 01/01/96 09/01/95

94–04–U–02–SJC, San Jose, CA ........................................... 03/28/01 NA NA 01/01/96 09/01/95

95–05–C–01–SJC, San Jose, CA ........................................... 03/28/01 $9,094,000 $4,059,393 06/01/99 02/01/99

92–01–1–01–BUF, Buffalo, NY ............................................... 03/28/01 $78,731,538 $81,167,538 12/01/04 12/01/04

95–02–C–03–BUF, Buffalo, NY ............................................... 03/28/01 $6,748,496 $6,748,496 07/01/15 07/01/15

*00–04–C–01–VLD, Valdosta, GA ........................................... 03/30/01 $230,300 $230,300 06/01/01 09/01/01

97–03–C–05–DFW, Dallas/Fort Worth, TX ............................. 03/30/01 $261,050,427 $121,412,427 04/01/01 02/01/00

93–01–C–01–CKB, Clarksburg, WV ........................................ 04/02/01 $105,256 $79,103 04/01/96 10/01/95

99–02–C–01–COD, Cody, WY ................................................ 04/13/01 $219,000 $219,000 07/01/02 03/01/02

*96–05–C–05–ORD, Chicago, IL ............................................. 04/16/01 $456,884,197 $451,595,749 11/01/11 04/01/08

*98–07–C–01–ORD, Chicago IL .............................................. 04/16/01 $61,717,809 $52,903,281 08/01/12 06/01/08

*98–03–C–01–HDN, Hayden, CO ........................................... 04/18/01 $1,130,176 $1,130,176 12/01/02 06/01/02

93–01–C–03–GEG, Spokane, WA .......................................... 04/18/01 $12,676,598 $12,594,838 04/01/98 04/01/98

98–03–C–03–BGM, Binghamton, NY ...................................... 04/20/01 $1,811,886 $611,886 04/01/06 10/01/03

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2001 / Notices 31971

AMENDMENTS TO PFC APPROVALS—Continued

Amendment No. City, State

Amendment

Approved

Date

Original Approved Net PFC

Revenue

Amended Approved Net PFC

Revenue

Original Estimated

Charge Exp.

Date

Amended

Estimated

Charge Exp.

Date

94–04–C–02–CHO, Charlottesville, VA ................................... 04/23/01 $120,649 $117,084 10/01/93 10/01/93

95–07–1–03–CHO, Charlottesville, VA ................................... 04/23/01 $57,471 $59,785 09/01/00 09/01/00

97–10–C–02–CHO, Charlottesville, VA ................................... 04/23/01 $1,033,600 $1,027,904 12/01/03 12/01/03

*00–02–C–01–PIA, Peoria, IL .................................................. 04/24/01 $5,776,324 $5,776,324 09/01/09 02/01/07

*97–03–C–02–TOL, Toledo, OH ............................................. 04/24/01 $5,550,400 $5,500,400 08/01/04 12/01/03

*00–02–C–01–GTR, Columbus, MS ........................................ 04/25/01 $223,321 $222,321 06/01/08 08/01/05

92–01–C–04–MHT, Manchester, NH ...................................... 04/25/01 $2,994,523 $3,148,067 10/01/98 10/01/98

98–06–U–01–MHT, Manchester, NH ...................................... 04/25/01 NA NA 10/01/98 10/01/98

97–05–C–01–MHT, Manchester, NH ...................................... 04/27/01 $2,331,162 $2,386,396 10/01/98 10/01/98

96–03–C–01–SJU, San Juan, PR ........................................... 04/27/01 $73,424,050 $68,223,897 11/01/02 04/01/02

97–10–C–03–CHO, Charlottesville, VA ................................... 04/30/01 $1,027,904 $897,404 12/01/03 09/01/03

99–13–U–01–CHO, Charlottesville, VA ................................... 04/30/01 NA NA 12/01/03 09/01/03

*93–01–C–06–LEX, Lexington, KY .......................................... 05/01/01 $15,185,918 $15,185,918 09/01/05 06/01/03

NOTE: The amendments denoted by an asterisk (*) include a change to the PFC level charged from $3.00 per enplaned passenger to $4,50

per enplaned passenger, For Valdosta, Georgia and Lexington KY, this change is effective on June 1, 2001. For Hayden, CO, Peoria, IL, and

Toledo, OH, this change is effective on July 1, 2001. Chicago, IL and Columbus, MS began collecting at a $4.50 level of April 1, 2001; the two

amendments for Chicago and one amendment for Comumbus listed continue $4.50 collections beyond the original approved charge expiration

date.)

Issued in Washington, DC, on June 6, 1996.

Eric Gabler,

Manager, Passenger Facility Charge Branch.

[FR Doc. 01–14908 Filed 6–12–01; 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

Houghton County Memorial Airport,

Hancock, MI

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 Houghton County

Memorial 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 July 13, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Comments on this

application may be mailed or delivered

in triplicate to the FAA at the following

address: Federal Aviation

Administration, Detroit Airports District

Office, Willow Run Airport, East, 8820

Beck Road, Belleville, Michigan 48111.

In addition, one copy of any

comments submitted to the FAA must

be mailed or delivered to Sandra D. La

Mothe, Airport Manager, Houghton

County Memorial Airport at the

following address: Houghton County

Memorial Airport, 23810 Airpark

Boulevard, Suite 113, Calumet,

Michigan 49913. Air carriers and foreign

air carriers may submit copies of written

comments previously provided to the

Houghton County Memorial Airport

under section 158.23 of part 158.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Arlene Draper, Program Manager,

Federal Aviation Administration,

Detroit Airports District Office, Willow

Run Airport, East, 8820 Beck Road,

Belleville, Michigan 48111 (734–487–

7282). 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

Houghton County Memorial 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 May 7, 2001, the FAA determined

that the application to impose and use

the revenue from a PFC submitted by

Houghton County Memorial Airport was

substantially complete within the

requirements of § 158.25 of part 158.

The FAA will approve or disapprove the

application, in whole or in part, no later

than August 14, 2001.

The following is a brief overview of

the application.

PFC Application No.: 01–08–C–00–

CMX.

Level of the proposed PFC: $3.00.

Proposed charge effective date: July 1,

2001.

Proposed charge expiration date:

September 1, 2005.

Total estimated PFC revenue:

$254,644.00.

Brief description of proposed projects:

Reimbursement of charges for PFC

application 99–07–C–00–CMX

preparation, rehabilitate runway 13/31

and relocate high intensity runway

lights.

Class or classes of air carriers which

the public agency has requested not be

required to collect PFCs: No class

requested to be excluded.

Any person may inspect the

application in person at the FAA office

listed above under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT.

In addition, any person may, upon

request, inspect the application, notice,

and other documents germane to the

application in person at the Houghton

County Memorial Airport.

Issued in Des Plaines, Illinois, on June 6,

2001.

Benito De Leon,

Manager, Planning and Programming Branch,

Airports Division, Great Lakes Region.

[FR Doc. 01–14907 Filed 6–12–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M