25730 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 22, 1996 / Notices

The collection of information is an

application for employment with the

Federal Aviation Administration.

Applicants will have to complete a

number of background questions to

determine their basic eligibility for

Federal employment and also answer

specific occupation-related questions to

determine their qualifications.

NEED: P.L. 104–50 authorized the

Federal Aviation Administration to

establish its own personnel system

outside most of the requirements of

Title 5. The only provisions related to

hiring that will continue to apply are

those dealing with veteran’s preference.

One of the recommendations of our

personnel reform task forces, and in

keeping with reengineered business

processes under the National

Performance Review, we are attempting

to centralized and automate some of our

application, evaluation and hiring

processes. This application is a part of

that effort.

We propose to utilize the information

collected to make determinations on

applicant’s eligibility for Federal

employment as well as determining

their qualifications for employment and

certifying the name of qualified

applicants to line managers who will

make hiring decisions.

RESPONDENTS: The likely respondents

will be the general public who are

interested in employment with this

agency. We estimate that the average

number of respondents on an annual

basis to be 5,000, each applying one

time. The submission of this

information is completely voluntary on

the part of the applicant.

FREQUENCY: The frequency is based on

the respondent, however, we estimate

one time per respondent.

BURDEN: The estimated reporting burden

is 5,000 hours annually.

Copies of the proposed collection of

information may be obtained from: The

Federal Aviation Administration, Office

of Human Resource Management, Room

515, 800 Independence Avenue, SW.,

Washington, DC 20591.

Comments may be submitted to the

agency at the address above or to: Office

of Information and Regulatory Affairs,

Office of Management and Budget,

Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th

Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503.

Issued in Washington, DC on May 15,

1996.

Steve Hopkins,

Manager, Corporate Information Division.

[FR Doc. 96–12803 Filed 5–21–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

[Summary Notice No. PE–96–25]

Petitions for Exemption; Summary of

Petitions Received; Dispositions 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 petitions

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 June 10, 1996.

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. llll, 800

Independence Avenue, SW.,

Washington, D.C. 20591.

Comments may also be sent

electronically to the following internet

address: nprmcmts@mail.hq.faa.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:

Mr. D. Michael Smith, Office of

Rulemaking (ARM–1), Federal Aviation

Administration, 800 Independence

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591;

telephone (202) 267–7470.

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 May 16,

1996.

Donald P. Byrne,

Assistant Chief Counsel for Regulations.

Petitions for Exemption

Docket No: 28469.

Petitioner: Neptune, Inc.

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

137.53(b)(2).

Description of Relief Sought: To

permit appropriately trained pilots

employed by Neptune, who have less

than 100 hours of flight experience as

pilot in command in dispensing

agriculture materials or chemicals, to

conduct aerial firefighting operations

over congested areas.

Docket No.: 28503.

Petitioner: Mr. Kenneth R. Pearce.

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

91.109 (a) and (b)(3).

Description of Relief Sought: To allow

Mr. Pearce to provide recurrent flight

training and simulated instrument flight

training in Beechcraft Bonanza, Baron,

and Travel Air aircraft equipped with a

functioning throwover control wheel for

the purpose of meeting recency of

experience requirements contained in

§§ 61.56 (a), (c), (e), (g), and 61.57(e)(2).

Docket No.: 28512.

Petitioner: Mr. Robert P. Lavery.

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

91.109 (a) and (b)(3).

Description of Relief Sought: To allow

Mr. Lavery to conduct recurrent flight

training in Beechcraft Bonanza, Baron,

and Travel Air aircraft; and recurrent

flight training in simulated instrument

flight in Beechcraft Baron and Travel

Air aircraft, when those aircraft are

equipped with a functioning throwover

control wheel in place of functioning

dual controls.

Docket No.: 28514.

Petitioner: Mr. Henry D. Canterbury.

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

91.109 (a) and (b)(3).

Decription of Relief Sought: To allow

Mr. Canterbury to conduct recurrent

flight training in Beechcraft Bonanza,

Baron, and Travel Air aircraft; and

recurrent flight training in simulated

instrument flight in Beechcraft Baron

and Travel Air aircraft, when those

aircraft are equipped with a functioning

throwover control wheel in place of

functioning dual controls.

Docket No.: 28515.

Petitioner: Mr. Kenneth L. Fossler.

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

91.109 (a) and (b)(3).

Decription of Relief Sought: To allow

Mr. Fossler to conduct recurrent flight

training in Beechcraft Bonanza, Baron,

and Travel Air aircraft; and recurrent

flight training in simulated instrument
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 22, 1996 / Notices 25731

flight in Beechcraft Baron and Travel

Air aircraft, when those aircraft are

equipped with a functioning throwover

control wheel in place of functioning

dual controls.

Docket No.: 28517.

Petitioner: Mr. Samuel D. James.

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

91.109 (a) and (b)(3).

Decription of Relief Sought: To allow

Mr. James to conduct recurrent flight

training in Beechcraft Bonanza, Baron,

and Travel Air aircraft; and recurrent

flight training in simulated instrument

flight in Beechcraft Baron and Travel

Air aircraft, when those aircraft are

equipped with a functioning throwover

control wheel in place of functioning

dual controls.

Docket No.: 28530.

Petitioner: Mr. John A. Porter.

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

91.109 (a) and (b)(3).

Decription of Relief Sought: To allow

Mr. Porter to conduct recurrent flight

training in Beechcraft Bonanza, Baron,

and Travel Air aircraft; and recurrent

flight training in simulated instrument

flight in Beechcraft Baron and Travel

Air aircraft, when those aircraft are

equipped with a functioning throwover

control when in place of functioning

dual controls.

Docket No.: 28533.

Petitioner: Tradewind Turbines Corp.

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

21.19.

Decription of Relief Sought: To permit

Tradewind Turbines Corp., to apply for

a supplemental type certificate rather

than a new type certificate for a design

change that would replace two piston

engines with one turbine engine on the

Beechcraft 58P Baron.

Docket No.: 28536.

Petitioner: Mr. Kenneth W. Brown.

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

91.109 (a) and (b)(3).

Decription of Relief Sought: To allow

Mr. Brown to conduct recurrent flight

training in Beechcraft Bonanza, Baron,

and Travel Air aircraft; and recurrent

flight training in simulated instrument

flight in Beechcraft Baron and Travel

Air aircraft, when those aircraft are

equipped with a functioning throwover

control wheel in place of functioning

dual controls.

Docket No.: 28538.

Petitioner: Mr. John M. Hirsch.

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

91.109 (a) and (b)(3)

Decription of Relief Sought: To allow

Mr. Hirsch to conduct recurrent flight

training in Beechcraft Bonanza, Baron,

and Travel Air aircraft; and recurrent

flight training in simulated instrument

flight in Beechcraft Baron and Travel

Air aircraft, when those aircraft are

equipped with a functioning throwover

control wheel in place of functioning

dual controls.

Disposition of Petitions

Docket No.: 133CE.

Petitioner: Pilatus Aircraft LTD.

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

23.562(c)(5).

Description of Relief Sought/

Disposition: To allow Pilatus Aircraft

LTD to continue delivering aircraft

while they solve the problem of meeting

the requirements of § 25.562(c)(5) with a

customer acceptable solution.

Partial Grant, April 23, 1996,

Exemption No. 6429.

Docket No.: 28370.

Petitioner: Cessna Aircraft Company.

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

25.562.

Description of Relief Sought/

Disposition: To permit the Cessna

Aircraft Company exemption from the

emergency landing dynamic conditions

of § 25.562 for multiple-occupancy,

side-facing divans in the Cessna Model

750 airplane.

Partial Grant, April 25, 1996,

Exemption No. 6432.

Docket No.: 28463.

Petitioner: Cessna Aircraft Company.

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

25.161(d).

Description of Relief Sought/

Disposition: To permit the Cessna

Aircraft Company exemption from the

engine-out lateral/directional trim

requirements of § 25.161(d) of the FAR.

Grant, April 26, 1996, Exemption No.

6431.

[FR Doc. 96–12805 Filed 5–21–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

Airport Capital Improvement Program

National Priority System; Comment

Request

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of Airport Capital

Improvement Program (ACIP) National

Priority System; opportunity to

comment.

SUMMARY: The FAA is clarifying details

of the ACIP National Priority System.

Comments and recommendations for

improving the effectiveness of the ACIP

National Priority System are solicited.

DATES: Comments and/or

recommendations must be submitted on

or before July 22, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be delivered

or mailed to the FAA, Airports

Financial Assistance Division,

Programming Branch, APP–520, Room

615, 800 Independence Ave, SW,

Washington, DC 20591.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Stan Lou, Manager, Programming

Branch, Airports Financial Assistance

Division, Office of Airport Planning and

Programming, APP–520, on (202) 267–

8809.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FAA

Order 5100.39, ‘‘Airport Capital

Improvement Plan’’ describes

procedures that are intended to guide

the distribution of Airport Improvement

Program (AIP) funds to the highest

priority projects nationally. In order to

implement the ACIP Order, a standard

database has been established. This

database (NPIAS–CIP) provides a

common data structure to compile and

analyze airport development needs. A

key element of this process is the

determination of objective priority

ratings for items of work.

The National Priority is a numerical,

computer-generated system for

prioritizing work items in accordance

with agency goals. The ACIP is used as

a vehicle to evaluate requests for AIP

funded airport development in an

airport’s five year Capital Improvement

Program (CIP).

The ACIP uses a national priority

calculation as prescribed by Order

5100.39. Priority numbers are calculated

based on the size and type of airport

(service level) and the type of project (as

described by the NPIAS–CIP project

codes). The national priority

calculation:

• Provides a standard means to sort

projects from high to low priority.

• Is used to measure how well

funding plans (the ACIP) address the

highest priority needs.

• Imitates the existing AIP priority

system.

• Is not intended to be the sole gauge

for project approval.

The national priority calculation is as

follows:

(P*(APT+C+1)+T)*10+APT

Where:

P=Purpose Points (0 to 5 pts)

Safety/Security=0 pt.

Reconstruction=1 pt.

Standards=2 pts.

Environment=1pt.

Upgade=3 pts.

Capacity=3 pts.

New Airport (Community)= 5 pts.

New Airport (Capacity)=3 pts.

Planning=1 pt.

C=Component Points (1 to 6 pts)

Land=3 pts.

Runway=1 pt.

Taxiway=3 pts.

Apron=4 pts.