60-day FRN

40008

Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 134 / Friday, July 11, 2008 / Notices

Dated: June 25, 2008.
Condoleezza Rice,
Secretary of State, Department of State.
[FR Doc. E8–15862 Filed 7–10–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710–23–P

DEPARTMENT OF STATE
[Public Notice: 6284]

Exchange Visitor Program—
Termination of Flight Training
Programs
ACTION:

Statement of Policy.

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Stanley S. Colvin, Deputy Assistant
Secretary, Office of Private Sector
Exchange, Bureau of Educational and
Cultural Affairs, U.S. Department of
State, SA–44, 301 4th St., SW., Room
734, Washington, DC 20547. E-mail:
[email protected]; FAX: 202–203–
5087.
SUMMARY: Since 1949 the Department of
State (Department) has designated
private sector and governmental entities
to conduct training programs for eligible
foreign nationals. For the past twenty
years, such programs have included
flight training activities. Currently, eight
organizations facilitate the entry into the
United States of approximately 350
foreign nationals annually for the
purpose of flight training under the
aegis of the Exchange Visitor Program
and its J-visa. Regulations dealing
specifically with flight training
programs appear at 22 CFR 62.22(o).
These eight Department of State
designated flight schools are also
certified by the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS) to issue the
Form I–20, which is needed to obtain an
M visa. Regulations governing the M
visa appear at 8 CFR 214.2(m). DHS is
also responsible for the security-related
screening of all alien flight training
candidates. Regulations governing flight
training candidate screening appear at
49 CFR 1552. In January 2006, the
Department issued a Statement of Policy
on J–1 Flight Training Programs (71 FR
3913, January 24, 2006) providing notice
that it would henceforth not designate
any new J visa flight training program
sponsors; nor would it allow currentlydesignated flight training programs to
expand their programs, pending a
determination as to which Federal
agency ultimately would assume sole
responsibility for administering and
monitoring these programs.
In April 2006, the Department
published proposed modifications to its
regulations governing the Exchange
Visitor Program’s trainee category,

VerDate Aug<31>2005

17:19 Jul 10, 2008

Jkt 214001

including flight training. In response to
this proposed rule and by letter dated
May 30, 2006, the Office of Advocacy of
the Small Business Administration
opined, that if adopted, the
Department’s proposed modifications to
22 CFR 62.22(o), could have significant
impact on a substantial number of small
entities, in particular, flight training
schools that sponsor alien flight
candidates entering the United States on
the J visa. Given this comment, the
Department did not modify then
existing flight training regulations when
it adopted its Interim Final rule (72 FR
33669, June 19, 2007).
In December 2007, the Department
published a Final Rule (72 FR 72245,
December 20, 2007) that permits the
termination of designated programs that
the Department determines no longer
further its public diplomacy mission or
compromises the national security of
the United States (22 CFR 62.62). In
adopting this provision, the Department
explained that the Exchange Visitor
Program is the cornerstone of the
Department’s public diplomacy efforts
and integral to the furtherance of the
President’s Constitutional prerogatives
in conducting foreign affairs (72 FR
62112). Pursuant to this regulatory
authority, the Department hereby
determines that all flight training
programs no longer further the public
diplomacy mission of the Department,
and accordingly, effective June 1, 2010,
the Department will terminate the
Exchange Visitor Program sponsor
designations of all eight sponsors of
flight training programs.
The Department’s decision to
eliminate flight training from the
Exchange Visitor Program is based on
thorough consideration and
deliberation. As explained in its January
2006 Statement of Policy, the
Department does not have the expertise
and resources to monitor fully flight
training programs and ensure their
compliance with the national security
concerns that underlie the Patriot Act
(Pub. L. 107–56). Further, the Aviation
and Transportation Security Act of 2001
(49 U.S.C. 44939), assigns to the
Attorney General discretion to request a
wide variety of information from alien
flight candidates in order to determine
whether such flight candidates present
a threat to aviation or national security.
In light of this statutory directive, DHS
issued an Interim Final Rule on
September 20, 2004, assigning full
responsibility for the screening of alien
flight training candidates to DHS.
Finally, all Department designated flight
training sponsors are certified by the
Department of Homeland Security to
issue the Form I–20 and thereby permit

PO 00000

Frm 00071

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

foreign nationals to participate in flight
training programs under the M visa. As
all eight existing Department of State
designated sponsors may continue,
without interruption, the administration
of flight training programs for foreign
nationals, the Department believes that
concerns raised by the Office of
Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration are outweighed by the
security interests of the Government.
The Department’s position is sound
given the expertise of DHS to administer
and monitor such programs, efficiencies
of government operation, and the
security issues inherent in flight
training.
The flight training sponsors will
continue to have obligations to their
exchange visitors pursuant to 22 CFR
62.63: they must fulfill their
responsibilities to all exchange visitors
who are in the United States at the time
of their program termination until the
individual’s exchange program is
completed. Also, sponsors must notify
prospective exchange visitors who have
not yet entered the United States that
the program has been terminated. Such
sponsors will have access to SEVIS to
manage their existing program
participants, but will not be able to
initiate new programs after December
31, 2009.
Dated: June 30, 2008.
Stanley S. Colvin,
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Office of Private
Sector Exchange, Bureau of Educational and
Cultural Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. E8–15454 Filed 7–10–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710–05–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Office of the Secretary
[Docket Number: OST–95–179 and OST–95–
623]

Notice of Request for Extension of a
Previously Approved Collection
Office of the Secretary.
Notice and request for
comments.

AGENCY:
ACTION:

SUMMARY: In compliance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
Public Law 104–13, this notice
announces the Department of
Transportation’s (DOT) intention to
request extension of a previously
approved information collection.
DATES: Comments on this notice must be
received on or before September 9,
2008.
ADDRESSES: You may submit a comment
(identified by DOT Docket Numbers

E:\FR\FM\11JYN1.SGM

11JYN1

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 134 / Friday, July 11, 2008 / Notices
OST–95–179 and OST–95–623) by any
of the following methods:
• Web site: http://regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting
comments on the DOT electronic docket
site.
• Fax: 1–202–493–2251.
• Mail: Docket Management Facility;
U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building,
Room W12–140, Washington, DC
20590–001.
• Hand Delivery: Room W12–140 on
the ground level of the West Building,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Wednesday and Federal Holidays.
Instructions: All comments must
include the agency name and Docket
Numbers OST–95–179 and OST–95–
623. Note that all comments received
will be posted without change to
http://regulations.gov, including and
personal information provided. You
should know that anyone is able to
search the electronic from of all
comments received into any of our
dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the
comment, if submitted on behalf of an
association, business, labor union, etc.).
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments, go to http://regulations.gov
at any time or to Room W12–140 on the
ground level of the West Building, 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington,
DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 a.m., Monday
through Friday, except Wednesday and
federal holidays.
If you wish to receive confirmation of
receipt of your written comments,
please include a self-addressed,
stamped postcard with the following
statement: ‘‘Comments on Docket OST–
95–179 and OST–95–623’’. The Docket
Clerk will date stamp the postcard prior
to returning it to you via the U.S. mail.
Please note that due to delays in the
delivery of U.S. mail to Federal offices
in Washington, DC, we recommend that
persons consider an alternative method
(Internet, fax, or professional delivery
service) to submit comments to the
docket and ensure their timely receipt at
U.S. DOT.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Aleta Best, Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Aviation and International
Affairs, Office of the Secretary, U.S.
Department of Transportation, 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington,
DC, 20590, (202) 493–0797.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Title: Disclosure of Codesharing.
OMB Control Number: 2105–0537.
Expiration Date: November 30, 2008.

VerDate Aug<31>2005

17:19 Jul 10, 2008

Jkt 214001

Type of Request: Extension of a
previously approved collection.
Abstract: Codesharing is the name
given to a common airline industry
marketing practice where, by mutual
agreement between cooperating carriers,
at least one of the airline designator
codes used on a flight is different from
that of the airline operating the aircraft.
In one version, two or more airlines
each use their own designator codes on
the same aircraft operation. Although
only one airline operates the flight, each
airline in a codesharing arrangement
may hold out, market, and sell the flight
as its own in published schedules.
Codesharing also refers to other
arrangements, such as when a code on
a passenger’s ticket is not that of the
operator of the flight, but where the
operator does not also hold out the
service in its own name. Such
codesharing arrangements are common
between commuter air carriers and their
larger affiliates, and the number of
arrangements between U.S. air carriers
and foreign air carriers has also been
increasing. Arrangements falling into
this category are similar to leases of
aircraft with crew (wet leases).
The Department recognizes the strong
preference of air travelers for on-line
service (service by a single carrier) on
connecting flights over interline service
(service by multiple carriers).
Codesharing arrangements are, in part, a
marketing response to this demand for
on-line service. Often, codesharing
partners offer services similar to those
available for on-line connections with
the goal of offering ‘‘seamless’’ service
(i.e., service where the transfers from
flight to flight or airline to airline are
facilitated). For example, they may
locate gates near each other to make
connections more convenient or
coordinate baggage handling to give
greater assurance that baggage will be
properly handled.
Codesharing arrangements can help
airlines operate more efficiently because
they can reduce costs by providing a
joint service with one aircraft rather
than operating separate services with
two aircraft. Particularly in thin
markets, this efficiency can lead to
increased price and service options for
consumers or enable the use of
equipment sized appropriately for the
market. Therefore, the Department
recognizes that codesharing, as well as
long-term wet leases, can offer
significant economic benefits.
Although codesharing and wet-lease
arrangements can offer significant
consumer benefits, they can also be
misleading unless consumers know that
the transportation they are considering
for purchase will not be provided by the

PO 00000

Frm 00072

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

40009

airline whose designator code is shown
on the ticket, schedule, or itinerary and
unless they know the identity of the
airline on which they will be flying. The
growth in the use of codesharing, wetleasing, and similar marketing tools,
particularly in international air
transportation, had given the
Department concern about whether the
then-current disclosure rules (14 CFR
399.88) protected the public interest
adequately and led the Department to
adopt specific regulations requiring the
disclosure of code-sharing arrangements
and long-term wet leases on March 15,
1999. (14 CFR part 257)
These regulations required U.S.
airlines, foreign airlines and travel
agents doing business in the United
States, to notify passengers of the
existence of code-sharing or long-term
wet lease arrangements. It also required
U.S. airlines, foreign airlines and travel
agents to tell prospective consumers, in
all oral communications before booking
transportation, that the transporting
airline is not the airline whose
designator code will appear on travel
documents and identify the transporting
airline by its corporate name and any
other name under which that service is
held out to the public.
Respondents: All U.S. air carriers,
foreign air carriers, computer
reservations systems (CRSs), and travel
agents doing business in the United
States, and the traveling public.
Estimated Total Annual Burden:
Annual reporting burden for this data
collection is estimated at 653,183 hours
for all travel agents and airline ticket
agents and 653,183 hours for air
travelers, based on 15 seconds per
phone call and an average of 1.5 phone
calls per trip, for the approximately
33% of codeshare itineraries that
involve personal contact. Most of this
data collection (third party notification)
is accomplished through highly
automated computerized systems.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
16,000, excluding travelers.
Estimated Time per Response: At 15
seconds per call and an average of 1.5
calls per trip, a total of 22.5 seconds per
respondent or traveler, for the
approximately 33% of codeshare
itineraries that involve personal contact.
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether
this collection of information (third
party notification) is necessary for the
proper performance of the agency,
including whether the information will
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of
the agency’s estimate of burden of the
proposed collection of information; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information collected; and
(d) ways to minimize the burden of the

E:\FR\FM\11JYN1.SGM

11JYN1

40010

Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 134 / Friday, July 11, 2008 / Notices

collection of information on the
respondents, including through the use
of automated techniques or other forms
of information technology.
All responses to this notice will be
summarized and included in the request
for OMB approval. All comments will
also become a matter of public record.
Issued in Washington, DC.
Todd M. Homan,
Director, Office of Aviation Analysis.
[FR Doc. E8–15783 Filed 7–10–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–9X–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
Notice of Approval of Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI) on a Short
Form Environmental Assessment (EA);
Chicago/Rockford International
Airport, Rockford, IL
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of Approval of
Documents.

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES

AGENCY:

17:19 Jul 10, 2008

Jkt 214001

Issued in Des Plaines, Illinois, on June 19,
2008.
James G. Keefer,
Manager, Chicago Airports District Office,
FAA, Great Lakes Region.
[FR Doc. E8–15551 Filed 7–10–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) is issuing this
notice to advise the public of the
approval of a Finding of No Significant
Impact (FONSI) on an Environmental
Assessment for proposed Federal
actions at Chicago/Rockford
International Airport, Rockford, Illinois.
The FONSI specifies that the proposed
federal actions and local development
projects are consistent with existing
environmental policies and objectives as
set forth in the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 and will not
significantly affect the quality of the
environment.
A description of the proposed Federal
actions is: (a) To issue an environmental
finding to allow approval of the Airport
Layout Plan (ALP) for the development
items listed below.
The items in the local airport
development project are to: Acquire
approximately 18 acres of vacant land,
in fee simple title, in the Runway 25
Approach and Runway Protection Zone.
Copies of the environmental decision
and the Short Form EA are available for
public information review during
regular business hours at the following
locations:
1. Chicago/Rockford International
Airport, 60 Airport Drive, Rockford, IL
61109.
2. Division of Aeronautics—Illinois
Department of Transportation, One
Langhorne Bond Drive, Capital Airport,
Springfield, IL 62707.

VerDate Aug<31>2005

3. Federal Aviation Administration,
Chicago Airports District Office, 2300
East Devon Avenue, Room 320, Des
Plaines, Illinois 60018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Amy B. Hanson, Environmental
Protection Specialist, Federal Aviation
Administration, Chicago Airports
District Office, Room 320, 2300 East
Devon Avenue, Des Plaines, Illinois
60018. Ms. Hanson can be contacted at
(847) 294–7354 (voice), (847) 294–7046
(facsimile) or by e-mail at
[email protected].

Notice of Intent To Prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement and
Hold Scoping Meeting; Gnoss Field,
Novato, Marin County, CA
Federal Aviation
Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice of intent and notice of
scoping meeting.
AGENCY:

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) is issuing this
notice to advise the public that an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
will be prepared and considered for the
proposed extension of a runway,
corresponding taxiway extension,
associated levee construction and
realignment of drainage, and
reprogramming of the GPS Instrument
Approach for the extended runway. To
ensure that all significant issues related
to the proposed action are identified, a
public scoping meeting will be held.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Barry Franklin, Environmental
Protection Specialist, San Francisco
Airports District Office, Federal
Aviation Administration, WesternPacific Region, 831 Mitten Road, Room
210, Burlingame, California 94010–
1303, Telephone: (650) 876–2778,
extension 614.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Lead
Agency for the preparation of the EIS is
the FAA. The FAA will prepare an EIS
to evaluate the following development
alternatives and the No Action
Alternative as described below. The EIS
will determine all environmental
impacts, such as and not limited to,
noise impacts, impacts on air and water

PO 00000

Frm 00073

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

quality, wetlands, ecological resources,
floodplains, historic resources,
hazardous wastes, socioeconomics, and
economic factors.
Alternative One—Sponsor’s Proposed
Project
Runway 13/31 would be extended
1,100 feet to the north from 3,300 linear
feet to 4,400 linear feet. This length
would maintain the airport’s ability to
accommodate current and projected
airport operations.
To compliment the runway extension,
the corresponding taxiway for Runway
13/31 would be extended to the north
from 3,300 linear feet to 4,400 linear
feet. There would be associated levee
construction and major realignment of
drainage in order to protect the runway
extension against flooding. The GPS
instrument approach for Runway 13/31
would be reprogrammed to
accommodate the extension of the
runway.
Alternative Two
Runway 13/31 would be extended
1,100 feet to the south from 3,300 linear
feet to 4,400 linear feet. This length
would maintain the airport’s ability to
accommodate current and projected
airport operations.
To compliment the runway extension,
the corresponding taxiway for Runway
13/31 would be extended to the south
from 3,300 linear feet to 4,400 linear
feet. There would be associated levee
construction and major realignment of
drainage in order to protect the runway
extension against flooding. The GPS
instrument approach for Runway 13/31
would be reprogrammed to
accommodate the extension of the
runway.
Alternative Three
Runway 13/31 would be extended to
the north and to the south to bring the
runway length from 3,300 linear feet to
4,400 linear feet. This length would
maintain the airport’s ability to
accommodate current and projected
airport operations.
To compliment the runway extension,
the corresponding taxiway for Runway
13/31 would be extended to the north
and to the south to bring the total
taxiway length from 3,300 linear feet to
4,400 linear feet. There would be
associated levee construction and major
realignment of drainage in order to
protect the runway extension against
flooding. The GPS instrument approach
for Runway 13/31 would be
reprogrammed to accommodate the
extension of the runway.

E:\FR\FM\11JYN1.SGM

11JYN1