Notice of Final FAA Decision on Proposed Airport Access Restriction, 66397-66398 [E9-29397]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 239 / Tuesday, December 15, 2009 / Notices
submitted for FAA reconsideration of
this measure under Part 150 if an FAA
determination under Part 150 is being
sought; [Measure #34] Expansion of
Curfew was disapproved since the NCP
does not quantify the noise benefits and
this measure constitutes an airport noise
and access restriction that may only be
adopted after full compliance with the
Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990
(ANCA), and 14 CFR part 161. The
completed Part 161 analysis may be
submitted for FAA reconsideration of
this measure under Part 150 if an FAA
determination under Part 150 is being
sought; and [Measure #35] Cap/PhaseOut of Helicopters was disapproved
since the NCP does not quantify the
noise benefits and this measure
constitutes an airport noise and access
restriction that may only be adopted
after full compliance with the Airport
Noise and Capacity Act of 1990, and 14
CFR part 161. The completed Part 161
analysis may be submitted for FAA
reconsideration of this measure under
Part 150 if an FAA determination under
Part 150 is being sought. These
determinations are set forth in detail in
a Record of Approval signed by the
Associate Administrator for Airports
(ARP–1) on October 16, 2009. The
Record of Approval, as well as other
evaluation materials and the documents
comprising the submittal, are available
for review at the FAA office listed above
and at the administrative offices of the
City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles World
Airports.
The Record of Approval also will be
available on-line at: https://www.faa.gov/
airports_airtraffic/airports/
environmental/airport_noise/part_150/
states/.
Issued in Hawthorne on December 4, 2009.
Mark A. McClardy
Manager, Airports Division, Western-Pacific
Region.
[FR Doc. E9–29755 Filed 12–14–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Highway Administration
AGENCY: Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of Availability regarding
a Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI): K Street, 24th Street, NW., to
7th Street, NW., Washington, DC.
SUMMARY: The FHWA, in coordination
with the District Department of
Transportation (DDOT), is issuing a
Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI) for improvements to the K
Street Corridor in northwest
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:23 Dec 14, 2009
Jkt 220001
Washington, DC to efficiently
accommodate multi-modal travel,
including an exclusive transitway
within a portion of the existing street
right-of-way.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Federal Highway Administration,
District of Columbia Division: Mr.
Michael Hicks, Environmental/Urban
Engineer, 1900 K Street, Suite 510,
Washington, DC 20006–1103,
Telephone number 202–219–3513, email: michael.hicks@dot.gov; or Mr.
Faisal Hameed, Program Manager,
Project Development & Environment,
Transportation Policy & Planning
Administration, District Department of
Transportation, 2000 14th Street, NW.,
7th Floor, Washington, DC 20009,
Regular Office Hours 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Telephone number 202–671–2326,
e-mail: faisal.hameed@dc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
FHWA, in coordination with DDOT, is
issuing a FONSI for the preferred
alternative, Alternative 2, as identified
in the Final Environmental Assessment
for K Street, 24th Street, NW., to 7th
Street, NW., Washington, DC. This
project would reconstruct existing K
Street to provide an exclusive two-way,
two-lane, center transitway, flanked by
medians on either side that include bus
platforms, and three general purpose
lanes in each direction. Parking and
loading would be accommodated in the
curb lanes during off-peak hours.
Bicycles would be accommodated in the
curb lanes. The determination that the
proposed undertaking will not have a
significant impact on the environment
has been made pursuant to the Council
on Environmental Quality’s regulations
(40 CFR 1500) for implementing the
National Environmental Policy Act.
Electronic Access
An electronic copy of this document
may be downloaded, using a computer,
modem and suitable communications
software, from the Government Printing
Office’s Electronic Bulletin Board
Service at (202) 512–1661. Internet users
may reach the Office of the Federal
Register’s home page at: https://
www.nara.gov/fedreg and the
Government Printing Office’s Web site
at: https://www.access.gpo.gov/nara.
The FONSI will be available for
public review at: https://
www.fhwa.dot.gov/dcdiv/projects.htm
or https://www.ddot.dc.gov/kstreetEA.
Authority: 23 U.S.C. 315; 49 CFR 1.48
Mark Kehrli,
Division Administrator.
[FR Doc. E9–29771 Filed 12–14–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–22–P
PO 00000
Frm 00126
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
66397
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
Notice of Final FAA Decision on
Proposed Airport Access Restriction
AGENCY: Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice.
SUMMARY: The Airport Noise and
Capacity Act of 1990 (hereinafter
referred to as ‘‘the Act’’ or ‘‘ANCA’’)
provides notice, review, and approval
requirements for airports seeking to
impose noise or access restrictions on
Stage 3 aircraft operations that become
effective after October 1, 1990. 49 U.S.C.
47521 et seq.
The Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA) announces that it has
disapproved the application for an
airport noise and access restriction
submitted by the Burbank Glendale
Pasadena Airport Authority (BGPAA)
for Bob Hope Airport (BUR) under the
provisions of 49 U.S.C. 47524 of the
ANCA, and 14 CFR part 161. The FAA
determined that the application does
not provide substantial evidence the
restriction meets the six statutory
conditions for approval under ANCA
and part 161. The FAA’s decision was
issued October 30, 2009.
DATES: Effective Date: The effective date
of the FAA’s decision on the application
for a mandatory noise and access
restriction at BUR is October 30, 2009.
The FAA found the application was
completed on May 5, 2009 (74 FR
29530). The FAA opened a docket for
public comment (FAA–2009–0546). The
FAA received nearly 150 separate
comments, which were considered
during the FAA’s evaluation of the
BGPAA application.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Victoria L. Catlett, Planning and
Environmental Division, APP–400, 800
Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20591. E-mail address:
vicki.catlett@faa.gov. Telephone number
202–267–8770.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
February 3, 2009, FAA received
BGPAA’s initial request for approval of
a full, mandatory night-time curfew at
Bob Hope Airport as described in the
attached application. The application
states ‘‘Pursuant to FAR Part 161.311(d)
the Authority is seeking a full,
mandatory night-time curfew as
described in the attached application.
The [BGPAA] is not seeking any other
alternative restriction.’’ On March 5,
2009, FAA determined that the
application was complete except for the
E:\FR\FM\15DEN1.SGM
15DEN1
66398
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 239 / Tuesday, December 15, 2009 / Notices
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
environmental documentation provided
in support of a categorical exclusion
under the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA). By letter dated
March 9, 2009, BGPAA stated its intent
to supplement and resubmit the
application. On May 5, 2009, FAA
received BGPAA’s supplemented
application. On May 29, 2009, FAA
determined BGPAA’s application to be
complete. Pursuant to 14 CFR
161.313(c)(4)(ii), the FAA’s 180-day
review period starts on the date of
receipt of the last supplement to the
application (May 5, 2009).
The FAA may only approve a
restriction that demonstrates, by
substantial evidence, each of the six
statutory conditions have been met. 14
CFR part 161, § 161.305. These six
statutory conditions of approval are:
Condition 1: The restriction is
reasonable, nonarbitrary, and
nondiscriminatory; Condition 2: The
restriction does not create an undue
burden or interstate or foreign
commerce; Condition 3: The proposed
restriction maintains safe and efficient
use of the navigable airspace; Condition
4: The proposed restriction does not
conflict with any existing Federal
statute or regulation; Condition 5: The
applicant has provided adequate
opportunity for public comment on the
proposed restriction; and Condition 6:
The proposed restriction does not create
an undue burden on the national
aviation system. The FAA evaluated
BGPAA’s application under the
provisions of 14 CFR 161.317 and
determined the application satisfies the
requirements under Condition 4 and
Condition 5. However, the application
does not satisfy the requirements under
Condition 1, Condition 2, Condition, 3,
or Condition 6.
This notice also announces the
availability of the FAA’s final agency
order disapproving the airport access
restriction at https://www.faa.gov/
airports/.
Questions may be directed to the
individual named above under the
heading, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
Issued in Washington DC on December 4,
2009.
Benito DeLeon,
Director, Office of Airport Planning and
Programming.
[FR Doc. E9–29397 Filed 12–14–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:23 Dec 14, 2009
Jkt 220001
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2009–0170]
Highway Safety Programs; Conforming
Products List of Screening Devices To
Measure Alcohol in Bodily Fluids
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice.
SUMMARY: This Notice amends and
updates the list of devices that conform
to the Model Specifications for
Screening Devices to Measure Alcohol
in Bodily Fluids.
DATES: Effective Date: December 15,
2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
De Carlo Ciccel, Behavioral Research
Division, NTI–131, National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC
20590; Telephone: (202) 366–1694.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August
2, 1994, NHTSA published Model
Specifications for Screening Devices to
Measure Alcohol in Bodily Fluids (59
FR 39382). These specifications
established performance criteria and
methods for testing alcohol screening
devices to measure alcohol content. The
specifications support State laws that
target youthful offenders (e.g., ‘‘zero
tolerance’’ laws) and the Department of
Transportation’s workplace alcohol
testing program. NHTSA published its
first Conforming Products List (CPL) for
screening devices on December 2, 1994
(59 FR 61923, with corrections on
December 16, 1994 in 59 FR 65128),
identifying the devices that meet
NHTSA’s Model Specifications for
Screening Devices to Measure Alcohol
in Bodily Fluids. Five devices appeared
on that first list. Thereafter, NHTSA
amended the CPL on August 15, 1995
(60 FR 42214) and on May 4, 2001 (66
FR 22639), adding 7 devices to the CPL
in those two actions. On September 19,
2005, NHTSA published an updated
CPL (70 FR 54972), adding several
devices to the list and removing several
other devices. Subsequently NHTSA
discovered an error regarding the name
of a device listed on the CPL and
republished the CPL on December 5,
2005 (70 FR 72502) to correct the error.
NHTSA last published an update to the
CPL on January 31, 2007 (72 FR 4559),
adding 3 new devices.
On March 31, 2008, NHTSA
published revised Model Specifications
for Screening Devices to Measure
Alcohol in Bodily Fluids (73 FR 16956).
PO 00000
Frm 00127
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
These specifications removed testing of
interpretive screening devices (ISDs)
because ISDs did not provide an
unambiguous test result. These
specifications also removed from use
the Breath Alcohol Sample Simulator as
it is not necessary for testing breath
alcohol screening devices. All other
performance criteria and test methods
were maintained.
Since the publication of the last CPL,
NHTSA has evaluated additional
devices at the Volpe National
Transportation Systems Center (VNTSC)
in Cambridge, Massachusetts, resulting
in the addition of 14 new breath alcohol
screening devices to the CPL. One
device is being removed from the CPL
as it is no longer supported or sold by
the manufacturer and several devices
are being renamed.
(1) AK Solutions USA, LLC,
submitted 3 screening devices for
testing, several trade name revisions,
and the removal of 1 device from the
CPL. The trade names of the new
conforming devices are: AlcoMate
AccuCell AL–9000, a handheld device
with a fuel cell sensor; AlcoMate
Premium AL–7000, a handheld device
that utilizes replaceable semiconductor
detectors, and AlcoMate Prestige (AL–
6000), also a handheld device that
utilizes replaceable semiconductor
detectors. The replaceable detectors also
conform to the model specifications and
are specific to each device. Alcoscan
AL–5000 is being removed from the list.
This device is no longer being sold or
supported by the manufacturer. The
following three devices are being
renamed: SafeMate (formerly known as
AlcoChecker), SafeDrive (formerly
known as AlcoKey), and AlcoMate Core
(formerly known as Alcoscan AL–6000).
(2) BAC Solutions, Inc., submitted a
screening device for testing. The trade
name for this device is BACmaster. This
is a bench top stationary screening
device with an infrared detector. (3)
B.E.S.T. Labs, Inc., submitted a device
for testing. The PB 9000e is a handheld
device with a fuel cell sensor. (4) CMI,
Inc., submitted a device for testing. This
device, the Intoxilyzer 500, with a
handheld fuel cell sensor conforms to
the model specification for alcohol
screening devices. This is the same
device listed below as the Alcometer
500, distributed by Lion Laboratories,
Ltd. (5) First Innovative Technology
Group, Ltd., submitted a device, the
AAT198 Pro. This is a handheld device
with a semiconductor detector. (6) Guth
Laboratories, Inc., submitted the
Alcotector WAT90 for testing. This
conforming device is handheld with a
fuel cell sensor. (7) KHN Solutions, LLC,
submitted 2 screening devices for
E:\FR\FM\15DEN1.SGM
15DEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 239 (Tuesday, December 15, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66397-66398]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-29397]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
Notice of Final FAA Decision on Proposed Airport Access
Restriction
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990 (hereinafter
referred to as ``the Act'' or ``ANCA'') provides notice, review, and
approval requirements for airports seeking to impose noise or access
restrictions on Stage 3 aircraft operations that become effective after
October 1, 1990. 49 U.S.C. 47521 et seq.
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) announces that it has
disapproved the application for an airport noise and access restriction
submitted by the Burbank Glendale Pasadena Airport Authority (BGPAA)
for Bob Hope Airport (BUR) under the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 47524 of
the ANCA, and 14 CFR part 161. The FAA determined that the application
does not provide substantial evidence the restriction meets the six
statutory conditions for approval under ANCA and part 161. The FAA's
decision was issued October 30, 2009.
DATES: Effective Date: The effective date of the FAA's decision on the
application for a mandatory noise and access restriction at BUR is
October 30, 2009. The FAA found the application was completed on May 5,
2009 (74 FR 29530). The FAA opened a docket for public comment (FAA-
2009-0546). The FAA received nearly 150 separate comments, which were
considered during the FAA's evaluation of the BGPAA application.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Victoria L. Catlett, Planning and
Environmental Division, APP-400, 800 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20591. E-mail address: vicki.catlett@faa.gov. Telephone
number 202-267-8770.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On February 3, 2009, FAA received BGPAA's
initial request for approval of a full, mandatory night-time curfew at
Bob Hope Airport as described in the attached application. The
application states ``Pursuant to FAR Part 161.311(d) the Authority is
seeking a full, mandatory night-time curfew as described in the
attached application. The [BGPAA] is not seeking any other alternative
restriction.'' On March 5, 2009, FAA determined that the application
was complete except for the
[[Page 66398]]
environmental documentation provided in support of a categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). By letter
dated March 9, 2009, BGPAA stated its intent to supplement and resubmit
the application. On May 5, 2009, FAA received BGPAA's supplemented
application. On May 29, 2009, FAA determined BGPAA's application to be
complete. Pursuant to 14 CFR 161.313(c)(4)(ii), the FAA's 180-day
review period starts on the date of receipt of the last supplement to
the application (May 5, 2009).
The FAA may only approve a restriction that demonstrates, by
substantial evidence, each of the six statutory conditions have been
met. 14 CFR part 161, Sec. 161.305. These six statutory conditions of
approval are: Condition 1: The restriction is reasonable, nonarbitrary,
and nondiscriminatory; Condition 2: The restriction does not create an
undue burden or interstate or foreign commerce; Condition 3: The
proposed restriction maintains safe and efficient use of the navigable
airspace; Condition 4: The proposed restriction does not conflict with
any existing Federal statute or regulation; Condition 5: The applicant
has provided adequate opportunity for public comment on the proposed
restriction; and Condition 6: The proposed restriction does not create
an undue burden on the national aviation system. The FAA evaluated
BGPAA's application under the provisions of 14 CFR 161.317 and
determined the application satisfies the requirements under Condition 4
and Condition 5. However, the application does not satisfy the
requirements under Condition 1, Condition 2, Condition, 3, or Condition
6.
This notice also announces the availability of the FAA's final
agency order disapproving the airport access restriction at https://www.faa.gov/airports/.
Questions may be directed to the individual named above under the
heading, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Issued in Washington DC on December 4, 2009.
Benito DeLeon,
Director, Office of Airport Planning and Programming.
[FR Doc. E9-29397 Filed 12-14-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P