ANCA Statutory (Clarification) Change in 2000

30472

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 92 / Thursday, May 11, 2000 / Notices

reduction was recommended by EPA for
noise attenuation. TVA’s response is as
follows: TVA has committed to further
study the noise levels in the vicinity of
the site to determine whether additional
noise mitigation is needed and to
identify appropriate mitigation
methods. Source reduction in noise
levels may not be the most cost effective
way to prevent adverse impacts to area
residents. TVA prefers to follow a plan
to confirm the existence of community
noise concerns, and to obtain adequate
noise data which would allow for the
verification of the legitimacy of the
complaints and support the structuring
of a suitable mitigation measure. This
approach would avoid committing to a
solution to a problem which may or may
not exist, or be the best solution. As
noted in the FEIS, potential mitigation
measures include techniques for
reducing noise at its source and
methods that would reduce noise at
receptor locations.
EPA comment on TVA response 55 in
the FEIS expressed a potential for an
environmental justice (EJ) concern
based on the demographics presented by
TVA. There were also questions
concerning the extent and success of
public interaction with respect to EJ.
TVA’s response is as follows: As
discussed in the FEIS, there are only
three occupied dwellings within one
mile of the Lagoon Creek Site. The EIS
found only minimal environmental
impacts and no significant
environmental impacts on the residents
of area surrounding the site. Due to the
lack of significant impacts and the
sparse population in the area, no EJ
concerns were found. As discussed in
Chapter 2 of the FEIS, the site screening
process included several other sites for
this project, but they were determined
to be less suitable than the sites in
Haywood County. Some of these sites
have relatively smaller minority
populations than does Haywood
County. Residents of the surrounding
area were given various options for
expressing any concerns they might
have. All affected landowners (over
100), which included all adjacent
properties, were sent copies of the
Executive Summaries of the Draft and
Final EISs, along with an invitation to
the public meeting on the DEIS. The
meeting itself included not only a
presentation about the project, but also,
prior to the formal presentation, an open
house where anyone could talk
individually with TVA staff to discuss
concerns or ask questions. Fewer than
fifteen private citizens attended the
public meeting on the DEIS, despite
several paid advertisements in local and

VerDate 272000

15:36 May 10, 2000

regional newspapers and a TVA news
release, each describing the availability
of the DEIS and the public meeting date
and time. No oral or written comments
were received from any Haywood
County resident not affiliated with local
government. Among the elected officials
involved, participants included one
African American member of County
Commission. None of the public
comments received expressed concern
about EJ issues. Benefits associated with
the project include increased public
revenues, along with a very small
increase in employment and income in
the area
EPA comment on TVA response 57 in
the FEIS was concerned with induced
economic impacts due to increased
power system reliability. TVA’s
response is as follows: Our approach in
preparing the FEIS section on Indirect
Impacts was to assess the local (within
the county) induced impacts of the
proposed project. In keeping with CEQ
guidance for evaluating indirect or
induced effects, we believe that the
regional effects of this proposal are not
‘‘reasonably foreseeable’’, or close
enough in time and distance to the
proposed project for a meaningful
evaluation. Such an evaluation would
certainly be speculative and qualitative,
since it could not be predicted how,
where, and when the additional peaking
power would be used in the region, and
consequently of little use to decisionmakers regarding initiation of the
proposal. We agree that basic utilities
are critical to the economic viability of
most any industry. TVA’s mandate, as
defined in the 1933 TVA Act, is, among
other things, to provide reliable, lowcost power to the Tennessee Valley
region and to foster industrial
development for the economic good of
the people of the region. It is our hope
that more reliable peaking power and
other infrastructure being developed by
TVA will be attractive to potential new
industries and lead to the expansion of
existing ones. However, we believe that
economic growth should not sacrifice
environmental quality. We further
believe that the regulatory programs of
the various Valley states, in conjunction
with TVA programs for sustaining the
quality of the environment in the region,
will allow economic growth to occur in
a manner that maintains or enhances
environmental quality.
Dated: May 1, 2000.
Joseph R. Bynum,
Executive Vice President, Fossil Power Group.
[FR Doc. 00–11859 Filed 5–10–00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8120–08–P

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00085

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
Changes in Permissible Stage 2
Airplane Operations
AGENCY: Federal Aviation
Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice of statutory changes.
SUMMARY: The FAA is publishing notice
of further changes to the Airport Noise
and Capacity Act that except certain
airplanes from the law and allow
operation of Stage 2 airplanes after
December 31, 1999, under specified
circumstances. This notice is
necessitated by Congressional action
taken in April 2000 to modify the
statutory changes adopted in November
1999. This notice explains the effect of
the changes.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Thomas Connor, Manager, Noise
Division (AEE–100), Office of
Environment and Energy, FAA, 800
Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202)
267–8933, fax (202) 267–5594, email
Thomas. Connor@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background
The Airport Noise and Capacity Act of
1990 (ANCA) prohibits the operation of
civil subsonic turbojet Stage 2 airplanes
over 75,000 pounds in the contiguous
United States after December 31, 1999.
The original version of the law did not
distinguish airplanes by type of
certification or operation. The waiver
provisions of the original law are very
limited, and address only limited
revenues operation of Stage 2 airplanes
by U.S. air carriers.
On November 29, 1999, the President
signed into law certain changes to
ANCA that affect operators of Stage 2
airplanes. The prohibit on revenue
operations of Stage 2 airplanes after
December 31, 1999, remained in effect.
The Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA) was not granted any new
authority to allow anyone to operate at
Stage 2 airplane in revenue service after
December 31, 1999. The changes to the
law were summarized in the Federal
Register document published December
17, 1999 (64 FR 70571).
On April 5, 2000, new authorizing
legislation became effective. That bill,
the Wendell H. Ford Aviation
investment and Reform Act for the 21st
Century, Public Law 10–181 (Apr. 5,
2000; 114 Stat. 61) (AIR 21) repealed the
legislative changes that were adopted in
November 1999 and were described in
the Federal Register notice cited above.

E:\FR\FM\11MYN1.SGM

pfrm01

PsN: 11MYN1

30473

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 92 / Thursday, May 11, 2000 / Notices
The repealed provisions were re-enacted
in AIR 21 with two additions.
New Provisions
Foreign Air Carrier Waivers
The original language of ANCA did
not allow foreign air carriers to apply for
a waiver from the Stage 2 prohibition in
the law. The AIR 21 amendment
expanded the waiver provision, 49
U.S.C. 47528(b), to allow foreign air
carriers, for a limited time, to apply for
a waiver from the Stage 3 aircraft
requirement of 49 U.S.C. 47528(a). The
amendment requires that a foreign air
carrier seeking a waiver must apply ‘‘not
later than * * * the 15th day following
the date of enactment of [AIR 21].’’ The
law was enacted April 5, 2000; foreign
air carriers seeking a waiver from
section 47528(a) must have filed an
application for waiver no later than
April 20, 2000.
The FAA will consider any waiver
request filed by a foreign air carrier
under the same criteria that were used
to evaluate requests from domestic air
carriers. Those criteria are published at
14 CFR 91.873, and were summarized in
a Federal Register notice published on
March 2, 1998 (63 FR 10123).
Relationship to Part 161 Actions
In AIR 21, Congress re-enacted the
provisions that direct the Secretary of
Transportation to permit certain
nonrevenue flights to Stage 2 airplanes
over 75,000 pounds, 49 U.S.C. 47528(f).
A new paragraph (g), which reads as
follows, was added to that section:
(g) Statutory Construction.—Nothing in
this section may be construed as interfering
with, nullifying, or otherwise affecting
determinations made by the Federal Aviation
Administration, or to be made by the
Administration with respect to applications
under part 161 of title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations, that were pending on November
1, 1999.

Promulgated by the FAA in 1991
pursuant to ANCA, 14 CFR part 161 is
titled ‘‘Notice and Approval of Airport
Noise Access Restrictions,’’ and
provides a procedure under which local
airport authorities may impose
restrictions on Stage 2 and Stage 3
airplanes. On November 1, 1999, there
was one restriction on operation of
Stage 2 airplanes that had been adopted
by a local airport authority but had not
yet become effective. Prior to November
1, 1999, the FAA had made a
determination that this local restriction
was pre-empted by Federal law. The
FAA understands new paragraph (g) to
mean that this prior determination, and
any future determination regarding the
local restriction, are not affected by the

VerDate 272000

15:36 May 10, 2000

new provisions added to section 47528
by AIR 21.
The FAA has consistently held that
the statutory waiver authority it was
granted in ANCA in 1990 (49 U.S.C.
47528(b)) preempts any conflicting
restriction adopted by a local airport
authority. Similarly, the authority that
permits nonrevenue Stage 2 flights
under section 47528(f) also preempts
any conflicting local regulations. This
position is affirmed by the AIR 21
language, in that the authority given in
section 47528(f) is not discretionary.
The law states that ‘‘the Secretary shall
permit’’ Stage 2 flights that fall under
one of the categories listed in the law
(emphasis added). The FAA’s
interpretation of the new language in
paragraph (g) is consistent with the nondiscretionary nature of the FAA’s
authority under section 47528(f).
Previous Statutory Changes
As discussed above, the statutory
change that allows the FAA to grant
special flight authorizations for the
nonrevenue operation of certain Stage 2
airplanes was re-enacted in AIR 21.
Accordingly, except for the additions
noted above, the explanations provided
in the FAA’s December 17, 1999 Federal
Register notice remain applicable, and
the application procedure and form
have not been changed.
The FAA still plans to amend its
regulations at 14 CFR part 91, subpart I,
that are affected by the changes to its
statutory authority. The reasons for
these amendments remain the same as
published in December 1999.
The FAA was required under the
November 1999 legislation, and again by
AIR 21, to publish notice of the
procedures it will use to implement the
Stage 2 nonrevenue flight authority.
This notice fulfills that requirement by
informing affected persons that the
application procedure for a special
flight authorization for nonrevenue
Stage 2 flight remains as published in
December 1999.
The special flight authorization
application can be obtained on the
FAA’s web site (http://www.aee.faa.gov/
sfa/), or by fax or mail by contacting the
Office of Environment and Energy at the
number listed in the For Further
Information Contact section above. The
FAA reminds operators that requests for
special flight authorizations for
nonrevenue Stage 2 flights should be
filed 30 days before the planned flight.
Operators of Stage 2 airplanes that
have any questions concerning their
rights or requirements under AIR 21
language are encouraged to contact the
FAA as soon as possible.

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00086

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

Issued in Washington, DC on May 2, 2000.
Paul R. Dykeman,
Deputy Director, Office of Environment and
Energy.
[FR Doc. 00–11325 Filed 5–10–00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
Environmental Impact Statement:
Faulkner County, Arkansas
AGENCY: Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of intent.
SUMMARY: The FHWA is issuing this
notice to advise the public that an
environmental impact statement (EIS)
will be prepared for a proposed highway
project in Faulkner County, Arkansas.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Amy Heflin, Community Planner,
Federal Highway Administration, 700
West Capitol, Rm 3130 Federal Office
Building, Little Rock, Arkansas 72201–
3298, Telephone: (501) 324–5625; or
Ronnie Hall, City Engineer, City of
Conway, 100 East Robins, Conway,
Arkansas 72032, Telephone: (501) 450–
6165; or Mike Lynch, Project Manager,
Garver Engineers, P.O. Box 50, Little
Rock, Arkansas 72203, Telephone (501)
376–3633.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
FHWA, in cooperation with the City of
Conway, Arkansas, and the Arkansas
Highway and Transportation
Department will prepare an
environmental impact statement (EIS)
on a proposal to construct a western
loop in Faulkner County, Arkansas. The
proposed project would involve the
construction of an arterial on a new
alignment starting west of the City of
Conway at Interstate Highway 40 and
terminating South of the City of Conway
on Interstate Highway 40. Construction
of a western loop is considered
necessary to provide for the existing and
projected traffic demand. A proposed
alignment and typical section for this
proposed project will be formulated
during development of the EIS.
Alternatives under consideration
include taking no action and location
alternatives to be identified during the
EIS process.
Letters describing the proposed action
and soliciting comments will be sent to
appropriate Federal, State, and local
agencies, and to private organizations
and citizens who have previously
expressed or are known to have interest
in this project. An agency scoping
meeting is planned early in the project

E:\FR\FM\11MYN1.SGM

pfrm01

PsN: 11MYN1