Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 20 / Tuesday, January 30, 1996 / Notices 3077

Public Agency: Port of Seattle, Seattle,

Washington.

Application Number: 95–03–C–00–

SEA.

Application Type: Impose and use a

PFC.

PFC Level: $3.00.

Total Approved Net PFC Revenue:

$147,026,000.

Earliest Charge Effective Date: January

1, 1996.

Estimated Charge Expiration Date:

July 1, 2000.

Class of Air Carriers Not Required To

Collect PFC’S: None.

Brief Description of Projects Approved

for Collection and Use: Terminal apron

improvements, Runway 16R

rehabilitation, Noise programs,

Emergency power generators, Electrical

system power upgrade.

Brief Description of Projects Approved

for Collection: ARFF training facility,

Safety area improvements—16L/16R,

Passenger conveyance system.

Brief Description of Disapproved

Projects: Skybridge elevators, Land

acquisition for south aviation support

area development.

Determination: The public agency’s

financial plans and other project

documentation for both of these projects

state that the projects were financed

with the proceeds of 1992 revenue

bonds. The public agency then retired

the bonds using Airport Development

Funds (ADF). The public agency

proposes that the PFC revenues be used

to reimburse the ADF for the cost of the

projects so that the ADF can be used to

finance other revenue generating

projects in the airport capital

improvement plan. The FAA has

determined that the source of the ADF

is the rates and charges assessed to

airlines. Because of this, the public

agency cannot comply with Assurance

8(b) of the PFC assurances, which

prohibits a public agency from

including in its rate base any portion of

the capital cost paid for with PFC

revenue, for these projects. Furthermore,

based on the projects proposed to be

funded by the public agency from the

reimbursed ADF, the PFC revenue

would in effect be used to fund

ineligible projects. Therefore, the FAA

has determined that the financing plans

for these projects do not meet the

requirements of Part 158 and is

disapproving both projects.

Decision Date: December 29, 1995.

For Further Information Contact: Paul

Johnson, Seattle Airports District Office,

(206) 227–2655.

AMENDMENTS TO PFC APPROVALS

Amendment No., City, State

Amendment

approved

date

Amended approved net PFC

revenue

Original approved net PFC

revenue

Original estimated

charge exp.

date

Amended

estimated

charge exp.

date

92–01–C–02–RSW, Fort Myers, FL. ....................................... 10/12/95 $258,450,359 $258,920,512 08/01/18 05/01/17

91–01–C–01–SAV, Savannah, GA. ......................................... 11/07/95 49,908,639 39,501,502 03/01/04 12/01/15

92–01–I–02–ABE/94–03–U–01–ABE, Allentown PA. .............. 12/05/95 8,700,000 4,350,000 07/01/96 03/01/00

Issued in Washington, DC on January 23,

1996.

Donna P. Taylor,

Manager, Passenger Facility Charge Branch.

[FR Doc. 96–1624 Filed 1–29–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

Notice of Intent To Rule on Application

(#96–04–C–00–YKM) To Impose and

Use the Revenue From a Passenger

Facility Charge (PFC) at Yakima Air

Terminal, Submitted by Yakima Air

Terminal Board, Yakima, WA

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 PFC

revenue at Yakima Air Terminal under

the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 40117 and

Part 158 of the Federal Aviation

Regulations (14 CFR 158).

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before February 29, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Comments on this

application may be mailed or delivered

in triplicate to the FAA at the following

address: J. Wade Bryant, Manager;

Seattle Airports District Office, SEA–

ADO; Federal Aviation Administration;

1601 Lind Avenue SW, Suite 250;

Seattle, WA 98055–4056.

In addition, one copy of any

comments submitted to the FAA must

be mailed or delivered to Mr. Bob Clem,

Airport Manager at the following

address: Yakima Air Terminal, 2400

West Washington Avenue, Yakima, WA

98903.

Air Carriers and foreign air carriers

may submit copies of written comments

previously provided to Yakima Air

Terminal, under section 158.23 of Part

158.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. Cayla Morgan, (206) 227–2653;

Seattle Airports District Office, SEA–

ADO; Federal Aviation Administration;

1601 Lind Avenue SW, Suite 250;

Seattle, WA 98055–4056. 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 (#96–04–C–

00–YKM) to impose and use PFC

revenue at Yakima Air Terminal, under

the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 40117 and

Part 158 of the Federal Aviation

Regulations (14 CFR Part 158).

On January 22, 1995, the FAA

determined that the application to

impose and use the revenue from a PFC

submitted by Yakima Air Terminal

Board, Yakima, Washington, 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 April 26, 1996.

The following is a brief overview of

the application.

Level of the proposed PFC: $3.00.

Proposed charge effective date: March

1, 1996.

Proposed charge expiration date:

February 28, 1998.

Total estimated PFC revenues:

$432,000.00.

Brief description of proposed project:

Snow removal equipment—purchase

two snow plows; Expand snow removal

equipment (SRE) storage facility;

Terminal building renovation project—

Phase 2.

Class or classes of air carriers which

the public agency has requested not be

required to collect PFC’s: Air taxi/

commercial operators filing FAA Form

1800–31.

Any person may inspect the

application in person at the FAA office

listed above under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT and at the FAA

Regional Airports Office located at:

Federal Aviation Administration,

Northwest Mountain Region, Airports

Division, ANM–600, 1601 Lind Avenue
3078 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 20 / Tuesday, January 30, 1996 / Notices

S.W., Suite 540, Renton, WA 98055–

4056.

In addition, any person may, upon

request, inspect the application, notice

and other documents germane to the

application in person at the Yakima Air

Terminal.

Issued in Renton, Washington on January

22, 1996.

David A. Field,

Manager, Planning, Programming and

Capacity Branch, Northwest Mountain

Region.

[FR Doc. 96–1737 Filed 1–29–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

Maritime Administration

[Docket S–930]

Chestnut Shipping Company,

Keystone Shipping Co.; Application for

Amendment of a Previous Section 804

Waiver Which Authorized Keystone

Shipping Co. To Acquire an Interest in

or Charter Nine Foreign-Flag Liquid

Bulk Vessels

Chestnut Shipping Company

(Chestnut) requests amendment of

Docket A–180, served by the Maritime

Administrator (Administrator) on

November 15, 1990, in which the

Administrator with respect to

Operating-Differential Subsidy

Agreement (ODSA), Contract MA/MSB–

299, with Chestnut, waived until

November 11, 1996, the provisions of

section 804(a) of the Merchant Marine

Act, 1936, as amended (Act), so as to

permit Chestnut’s affiliate, Keystone

Shipping Co. (Keystone), to acquire an

interest in or charter up to nine foreignflag liquid bulk vessels to be operated in

U.S. foreign commerce, none to exceed

200,000 DWT.

Chestnut requests amendment of the

section 804 waiver as previously

granted to Chestnut in Docket A–180, in

order to allow Keystone until February

28, 1997, and any applicable extension

thereto, to own, charter, manage, act as

agent or broker for, or to have an interest

in up to twenty (20) dry, liquid or

combination liquid/dry bulk foreign-flag

vessels without restrictions as to the

size of the vessels or amount of cargo

such vessels can load. Chestnut advises

that Keystone agrees to be bound by the

conditions of earlier waivers imposed

by the Administrator which were

designed to assure against the diversion

of subsidy monies.

On December 22, 1993, the Maritime

Administration authorized separate

ODSAs for the two original vessels of

Chestnut, as follows:

(1) MA/MSB–299(a) on the

CHESTNUT HILL, to expire November

30, 1996, and

(2) MA/MSB–299(b) on the

KITTANNING, to expire February 28,

1997.

Under either of these ODSAs,

Chestnut is authorized to operate the

CORONADO, CHERRY VALLEY,

CHELSEA, CHILBAR or

FREDERICKSBURG, provided that the

annual amount of operating-differential

subsidy (ODS) accrued under each

ODSA can not exceed the amount of

ODS that would accrue for one-ship

year of operation of the vessel named in

the ODSA.

This application may be inspected in

the Office of the Secretary, Maritime

Administration. Any person, firm or

corporation having any interest in such

request within the meaning of section

804 of the Act and desiring to submit

comments concerning the application

must file written comments in triplicate

with the Secretary, Maritime

Administration, Room 7210, Nassif

Building, 400 Seventh Street SW.,

Washington DC 20590. Comments must

be received no later than 5:00 p.m. on

February 12, 1996. This notice is

published as a matter of discretion. The

Maritime Administrator will consider

any comments submitted and take such

action with respect thereto as may be

deemed appropriate.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

Program No. 2.804 Operating-Differential

Subsidies).

By Order of the Maritime Administrator.

Dated: January 25, 1996.

Joel C. Richard,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 96–1735 Filed 1–29–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–81–P

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

[NHTSA Docket No. 94–021; Notice 3]

Highway Safety Programs; Model

Specifications for Devices To Measure

Breath Alcohol

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: This notice amends the

Conforming Products List for

instruments that conform to the Model

Specifications for Evidential Breath

Testing Devices (58 FR 48705).

EFFECTIVE DATE: January 30, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.

James F. Frank, Office of Alcohol and

State Programs, NTS–21, National

Highway Traffic Safety Administration,

400 Seventh Street, S.W., Washington,

D.C. 20590; Telephone: (202) 366–5593.

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION: On

November 5, 1973, the National

Highway Traffic Safety Administration

(NHTSA) published the Standards for

Devices to Measure Breath Alcohol (38

FR 30459). A Qualified Products List of

Evidential Breath Measurement Devices

comprised of instruments that met this

standard was first issued on November

21, 1974 (39 FR 41399).

On December 14, 1984 (49 FR 48854),

NHTSA converted this standard to

Model Specifications for Evidential

Breath Testing Devices, and published a

Conforming Products List (CPL) of

instruments that were found to conform

to the Model Specifications as

Appendix D to that notice (49 FR

48864).

On September 17, 1993, NHTSA

published a notice (58 FR 48705) to

amend the Model Specifications. The

notice changed the alcohol

concentration levels at which

instruments are evaluated, from 0.000,

0.050, 0.101, and 0.151 BAC, to 0.000,

0.020, 0.040, 0.080, and 0.160 BAC;

added a test for the presence of acetone;

and expanded the definition of alcohol

to include other low molecular weight

alcohols including methyl or isopropyl.

On March 16, 1995, the most recent

amendment to the Conforming Products

List (CPL) was published (60 FR 14320),

identifying those instruments found to

conform with the Model Specifications.

Since the last publication of the CPL,

three (3) instruments have been

evaluated and found to meet the model

specifications, as amended on

September 17, 1993, for mobile and

non-mobile use. They are: CMI, Inc.’s

‘‘Intoxilyzer 300’’ (which is the same as

Lion Laboratories’ ‘‘Alcolmeter 300’’

that will also be listed); National Patent

Analytical Systems, Inc.’s ‘‘BAC Verifier

Datamaster’’ (which is the same as

Verax Systems’ ‘‘BAC Verifier

Datamaster’’ that will also be listed);

and National Draeger’s ‘‘Alcotest 7110

MKIII’’. Additionally, four devices

currently listed under the CMI brand

name (Intoxilyzer 200, Intoxilyzer 200D,

Intoxilyzer 1400 and Intoxilyzer 5000

CD/FG5) will also be listed under the

Lion Laboratories brand name. Lion

Laboratories and CMI, Inc. are both

wholely-owned subsidiaries of the same

parent company (MPD, Inc.) and the

devices are the same whether they are

sold by CMI or Lion Laboratories.

In accordance with the foregoing, the

CPL is therefore amended, as set forth

below.