Environmental Impact Statement, San Bernardino, CA, 64660 [E8-25889]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
64660
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 211 / Thursday, October 30, 2008 / Notices
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
EWR and provides greater opportunity
to plan for airport demand.
Additionally, although airlines may
reduce capacity in the short term, many
of the temporary reductions are in less
congested hours. Moreover, it is
important to have a comprehensive,
long-term system in place to manage
congestion and future growth at these
airports. The FAA intends to use its
authority under the Final Rule to
provide reservations for unscheduled
operations when reservations set aside
for scheduled operations are not
expected to be used, when capacity
exists in the system, and when events or
other local circumstances warrant
special consideration. The FAA believes
the flexibility to add reservations in
positive operating conditions could
allow greater access by general aviation
and other unscheduled operations
without the risks of having to
implement restrictions later in the day.
Use of Reservations for Alternate
Diversion Flights
NACA argues that the entire
reservation allocation process will
encourage individual carriers to hoard
unscheduled reservations to protect
their operations and then fail to use
those reservations, especially for those
awarded for alternate diversion
scenarios. NACA contends that the
proposed order encourages this behavior
because there is no accountability for
failure to use the reservation.
The FAA appreciates NACA’s
concerns regarding operators obtaining
reservations and failing to use them.
There are limited reservations, and
operators should not hoard or fail to
cancel unneeded ones because of the
impact on other operators. The FAA did
not propose a penalty for failing to use
a reservation. However, the FAA will
monitor reservations and actual
operations to determine if abuse occurs
and will work with individual operators
to eliminate any abusive behavior. The
final rule for JFK and EWR does not
contain a requirement to obtain a
reservation when filing flight plans
listing those airports as alternates
because such a requirement would
result in unnecessary reservations that
would remain unused in most cases. A
reservation requirement applies only to
actual operations at the airports, except
in the case of a declared emergency. The
FAA understands that there may be
other safety or operational justifications
that could dictate the use of an alternate
airport. However, this is not expected to
occur on a regular basis, and the FAA
would consider the individual
circumstances as part of any
enforcement proceeding.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:45 Oct 29, 2008
Jkt 211001
Delta and Continental suggest that the
FAA eliminate all unscheduled
operations during the peak hours to
maximize the efficiency of the airports.
The FAA considered these comments
but believes that the Final Rule strikes
the appropriate balance between the
operational needs of the various users of
the airports.
Issued in Washington, DC on October 23,
2008.
Rebecca B. MacPherson,
Assistant Chief Counsel for Regulations.
[FR Doc. E8–25850 Filed 10–29–08; 8:45 am]
Cost-Benefit Analysis of Limitations on
Unscheduled Operations
NetJets contends that the economic
analysis for limiting unscheduled
operations did not demonstrate any
congestion reduction benefit or properly
quantify the costs to aircraft operators.
Without this analysis, NetJets contends
there is no evidence that the proposed
limitations are justified, and the public
has had no opportunity to comment on
this justification.
The economic analysis addressed the
costs and benefits of implementing the
comprehensive congestion management
plan and includes limits on
unscheduled operations. Because all
operations contribute to the congestion
and delay problems at JFK and EWR, the
solution must incorporate limitations on
all operations. Under the Final Rule,
scheduled operations bear the majority
of the operational reduction. Even
though unscheduled operations, which
are a small fraction of the total
operations at JFK and EWR, are not the
root cause of the congestion and delay,
the current situation where demand
outstrips supply means that the addition
of even one operation can have a
disproportionate effect on congestion
and delay. Accordingly, these
limitations on unscheduled operations
are part of the comprehensive plan to
reduce congestion and delay.
Federal Highway Administration
Periodic Review of Orders
NACA requests the FAA to review the
necessity of limitations on unscheduled
operations on a semi-annual basis in
conjunction with the submission of
summer and winter flight schedules to
ensure that all operators may share in
any additional capacity.
The FAA agrees that available airport
capacity could potentially be used by
unscheduled operators. The Final Rule
provides for additional reservations
when weather and capacity conditions
allow, which includes decreased
demand by scheduled operators.
Additionally the Air Traffic
Organization, primarily through the Air
Traffic Control System Command
Center, constantly reviews demand at
JFK and EWR, and will respond
accordingly to changes in capacity by
adding reservations that do not result in
significant delay.
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Environmental Impact Statement, San
Bernardino, CA
Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of withdrawal.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The FHWA is providing this
notice to advise the public that the
California Department of Transportation
(Caltrans) is withdrawing the Notice of
Intent (NOI) published in the Federal
Register (Vol. 71, No. 128) on
Wednesday, July 5, 2006. That notice
addressed the intent to prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
for the proposed U.S. 395 Realignment
Freeway/Expressway project on U.S.
395 from Interstate 15 (I–15/U.S. 395
interchange) to Farmington Road. The
original NOI was published by FHWA.
Pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 327,
environmental responsibilities for this
project have been assigned to Caltrans.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Boniface Udotor, Senior Environmental
Planner, California Department of
Transportation, 464 West 4th Street, 6th
Floor, MS823, San Bernardino,
California 92401–1400; telephone (909)
388–1387.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Caltrans,
District 8, will stop further studies of
this proposed project to realign U.S.
395. The project is currently undergoing
re-scoping for project modifications.
The corridor, which was to be
evaluated, was located on either side of
existing U.S. 395 and to the west of
existing U.S. 395. The proposed 45-mile
project was to include studies within
the communities of Oak Hills, Hesperia,
Victorville, Adelanto and
unincorporated areas of San Bernardino
County.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance:
Program Number 20.205, Highway Research
Planning and Construction. The regulations
implementing Executive Order 12372
regarding inter-governmental consultation on
federal programs and activities apply to this
program.)
Issued on: October 24, 2008.
Nancy E. Bobb,
Director, State Programs.
[FR Doc. E8–25889 Filed 10–29–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–22–P
E:\FR\FM\30OCN1.SGM
30OCN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 211 (Thursday, October 30, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 64660]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-25889]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
Environmental Impact Statement, San Bernardino, CA
AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of withdrawal.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FHWA is providing this notice to advise the public that
the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) is withdrawing
the Notice of Intent (NOI) published in the Federal Register (Vol. 71,
No. 128) on Wednesday, July 5, 2006. That notice addressed the intent
to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the proposed
U.S. 395 Realignment Freeway/Expressway project on U.S. 395 from
Interstate 15 (I-15/U.S. 395 interchange) to Farmington Road. The
original NOI was published by FHWA. Pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 327,
environmental responsibilities for this project have been assigned to
Caltrans.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Boniface Udotor, Senior Environmental
Planner, California Department of Transportation, 464 West 4th Street,
6th Floor, MS823, San Bernardino, California 92401-1400; telephone
(909) 388-1387.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Caltrans, District 8, will stop further
studies of this proposed project to realign U.S. 395. The project is
currently undergoing re-scoping for project modifications. The
corridor, which was to be evaluated, was located on either side of
existing U.S. 395 and to the west of existing U.S. 395. The proposed
45-mile project was to include studies within the communities of Oak
Hills, Hesperia, Victorville, Adelanto and unincorporated areas of San
Bernardino County.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance: Program Number 20.205,
Highway Research Planning and Construction. The regulations
implementing Executive Order 12372 regarding inter-governmental
consultation on federal programs and activities apply to this
program.)
Issued on: October 24, 2008.
Nancy E. Bobb,
Director, State Programs.
[FR Doc. E8-25889 Filed 10-29-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-P
