[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 123 (Tuesday, June 27, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 33152-33156]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-15719]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Airspace Docket No. 95-AWA-3]


Proposed Establishment of Class C Airspace and Revocation of 
Class D Airspace, Cyril E. King Airport; VI

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice proposes to establish a Class C airspace area and 
revoke the existing Class D airspace area at the Cyril E. King Airport, 
Charlotte Amalie St. Thomas, VI. The Cyril E. King Airport is a public-
use facility with a Level II control tower served by Limited Radar 
Approach Control. The establishment of this Class C airspace area would 
require pilots to maintain two-way radio communications with air 
traffic control (ATC) while in Class C airspace. Implementation of the 
Class C airspace area would promote the efficient control of air 
traffic and reduce the risk of midair collision in the terminal area.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 4, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on the proposal in triplicate to: Federal 
Aviation Administration, Office of the Chief Counsel, Attention: Rules 
Docket [AGC-10], Airspace Docket No. 95-AWA-3, 800 Independence Avenue, 
SW., Washington, DC 20591.
    The official docket may be examined in the Rules Docket, Office of 
the Chief Counsel, Room 916, weekdays, except Federal holidays, between 
8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
    An informal docket may also be examined during normal business 
hours at the office of the Regional Air Traffic Division, P.O. Box 
20636, Atlanta, GA 30320.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia P. Crawford, Airspace and 
Obstruction Evaluation Branch (ATP-240), Airspace-Rules and 
Aeronautical Information Division, Air Traffic Rules and Procedures 
Service, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., 
Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-9255.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed 
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they 
may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the 
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing 
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are 
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, 
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal. 
Communications should identify the airspace docket number and be 
submitted in triplicate to the address listed above. Commenters wishing 
the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must 
submit with those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which 
the following statement is made: ``Comments to Airspace Docket No. 95-
AWA-3.'' The postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the 
commenter. All communications received on or before the specified 
closing date for comments will be considered before taking action on 
the proposed rule. The proposal contained in this notice may be changed 
in light of comments received. All comments submitted will be available 
for examination in the Rules Docket both before and after the closing 
date for comments. A report summarizing each substantive public contact 
with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the 
docket.

Availability of NPRM's

    Any person may obtain a copy of this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 
(NPRM) by submitting a request to the Federal Aviation Administration, 
Office of Public Affairs, Attention: Public Inquiry Center, APA-220, 
800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling (202) 
267-3485. Communications must identify the notice number of this NPRM. 
Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future NPRM's 
should also request a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, which 
describes the application procedure.

Background

    On April 22, 1982, the National Airspace Review (NAR) plan was 
published in the Federal Register (47 FR 17448). The plan encompassed a 
review of airspace use and procedural aspects of the ATC system. Among 
the main objectives of the NAR was the improvement of the ATC system by 
[[Page 33153]] increasing efficiency and reducing complexity. In its 
review of terminal airspace, NAR Task Group 1-2 concluded that Terminal 
Radar Service Areas (TRSA's) should be replaced. Four types of airspace 
configurations were considered as replacement candidates, of which 
Model B, since redesignated Airport Radar Service Area (ARSA), was 
recommended by a consensus of the task group.
    The FAA published NAR Recommendation 1-2.2.1, ``Replace Terminal 
Radar Service Areas with Model B Airspace and Service'' in Notice 83-9 
(July 28, 1983; 48 FR 34286) proposing the establishment of ARSA's at 
the Robert Mueller Municipal Airport, Austin, TX, and the Port of 
Columbus International Airport, Columbus, OH. ARSA's were designated at 
these airports on a temporary basis by SFAR No. 45 (October 28, 1983; 
48 FR 50038) to provide an operational confirmation of the ARSA concept 
for potential application on a national basis.
    Following a confirmation period of more than a year, the FAA 
adopted the NAR recommendation and, on February 27, 1985, issued a 
final rule (50 FR 9252; March 6, 1985) defining ARSA airspace and 
establishing air traffic rules for operation within such an area.
    Concurrently, by separate rulemaking action, ARSA's were 
permanently established at the Austin, TX, Columbus, OH, and the 
Baltimore/Washington International Airports (50 FR 9250; March 6, 
1985). The FAA stated that future notices would propose ARSA's for 
other airports at which TRSA procedures were in effect.
    Additionally, the NAR Task Group recommended that the FAA develop 
quantitative criteria for proposing to establish ARSA's at locations 
other than those which were included in the TRSA replacement program. 
The task group recommended that these criteria include, among other 
things, traffic mix, flow and density, airport configuration, 
geographical features, collision risk assessment, and ATC capabilities 
to provide service to users. These criteria have been developed and are 
being published via the FAA directives system.
    The FAA has established ARSA's at 121 locations under a paced 
implementation plan to replace TRSA's with ARSA's. This is one of a 
series of notices to implement ARSA's at locations with TRSA's or 
locations without TRSA's that warrant implementation of an ARSA. 
Airspace Reclassification, effective September 16, 1993, reclassified 
ARSA's as Class C airspace areas. This change in terminology is 
reflected in the remainder of this NPRM.
    This notice proposes Class C airspace designation at a location 
which was not identified as a candidate for Class C in the preamble to 
Amendment No. 71-10 (50 FR 9252). Other candidate locations will be 
proposed in future notices published in the Federal Register.
    The Cyril E. King Airport is a public-use airport with an operating 
Level II control tower served by Limited Radar Approach Control. 
Passenger enplanements reported at Cyril E. King Airport were 640,642, 
583,817, and 602,373, respectively, for calendar years 1993, 1992, and 
1991. This volume of passenger enplanements and aircraft operations 
meets the FAA criteria for establishing Class C airspace to enhance 
safety.

The Proposal

    The FAA is considering an amendment to part 71 of the Federal 
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 71) to establish a Class C airspace 
area and revoke the Class D airspace area at the Cyril E. King Airport, 
Charlotte Amalie, St. Thomas, VI. Cyril E. King Airport is a public 
airport with a Level II operating control tower served by Limited Radar 
Approach Control.
    The FAA published a final rule (50 FR 9252; March 6, 1985) which 
defines Class C airspace, and prescribes operating rules for aircraft, 
ultralight vehicles, and parachute jump operations in Class C airspace 
areas. The final rule provides, in part, that all aircraft arriving at 
any airport in Class C airspace or flying through Class C airspace 
must: (1) prior to entering the Class C airspace, establish two-way 
radio communications with the ATC facility having jurisdiction over the 
area; and (2) while in Class C airspace, maintain two-way radio 
communications with that ATC facility. For aircraft departing from the 
primary airport within Class C airspace area, or a satellite airport 
with an operating control tower, two-way radio communications must be 
established and maintained with the control tower and thereafter as 
instructed by ATC while operating in Class C airspace. For aircraft 
departing a satellite airport without an operating control tower and 
within Class C airspace, two-way radio communications must be 
established with the ATC facility having jurisdiction over the area as 
soon as practicable after takeoff and thereafter maintained while 
operating within the Class C airspace area (14 CFR 91.130).
    Pursuant to Federal Aviation Regulations section 91.130 (14 CFR 
part 91) all aircraft operating within Class C airspace are required to 
comply with sections 91.129 and 91.130. Ultralight vehicle operations 
and parachute jumps in Class C airspace areas may only be conducted 
under the terms of an ATC authorization.
    The FAA adopted the NAR Task Group recommendation that each Class C 
airspace area be of the same airspace configuration insofar as is 
practicable. The standard Class C airspace area consists of that 
airspace within 5 nautical miles of the primary airport, extending from 
the surface to an altitude of 4,000 feet above that airport's 
elevation, and that airspace between 5 and 10 nautical miles from the 
primary airport from l,200 feet above the surface to an altitude of 
4,000 feet above that airport's elevation. Proposed deviations from 
this standard have been necessary at some airports because of adjacent 
regulatory airspace, international boundaries, topography, or unusual 
operational requirements. The proposed Class C airspace area for the 
Cyril E. King Airport would consist of that airspace extending upward 
from the surface to and including 4,000 feet MSL within a 5-mile radius 
of the airport, and that airspace extending upward from 1,900 feet MSL 
to and including 4,000 feet MSL within a 10-mile radius of the airport.
    Definitions and operating requirements applicable to Class C 
airspace may be found in section 71.51 of part 71 and sections 91.1 and 
91.130 of part 91 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR parts 71, 
91). The coordinates for this airspace docket are based on North 
American Datum 83. Class C and Class D airspace designations are 
published, respectively, in paragraphs 4000 and 5000 of FAA Order 
7400.9B dated July 18, 1994, and effective September 16, 1994, which is 
incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class C airspace 
designation listed in this document would be published subsequently in 
the Order and the Class D airspace designation listed in this document 
would be removed subsequently from the Order.

Regulatory Evaluation Summary

    The FAA has determined that this rulemaking is not a ``significant 
rulemaking action,'' as defined by Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory 
Planning and Review). The anticipated costs and benefits associated 
with this notice are summarized below. (A detailed discussion of costs 
and benefits is contained in the full evaluation in the docket for this 
notice.) [[Page 33154]] 

Costs

    The establishment of the proposed St. Thomas Class C airspace area 
would impose a one-time FAA administrative cost of $600. For the 
aviation community (namely, aircraft operators and fixed-based 
operators), the NPRM would impose little, if any, operating or 
equipment cost. The potential costs are presented below.
    For the proposed Class C airspace area, the FAA does not expect to 
incur any additional costs for ATC staffing, training, or facility 
equipment. The FAA is confident that it can handle any additional 
traffic that would participate in radar services through more efficient 
use of personnel at the current staffing level.
    The FAA holds an informal public meeting at each proposed Class C 
airspace area location. These meetings provide pilots with the best 
opportunity to learn both how a Class C airspace area works and how it 
would affect their local operations. The expenses associated with these 
public meetings are incurred regardless of whether a Class C airspace 
area is ultimately established. Thus, they are more appropriately 
considered routine FAA costs. If the proposed Class C airspace area 
becomes a final rule, any subsequent public information costs would be 
strictly attributed to the proposal. For instance, the FAA would 
distribute a Letter To Airmen to all pilots residing within 50 miles of 
the Class C airspace area site. The Letter to Airmen would cost 
approximately $600. This one-time negligible cost would be incurred 
upon the initial establishment of the proposed Class C airspace area.
    The FAA anticipates that some pilots who currently transit the 
terminal area without establishing radio communications may choose to 
navigate around the proposed airspace. However, the FAA contends that 
these operators could navigate around, over, or, in certain cases, 
under the airspace without significantly deviating from their regular 
flight paths.
    The FAA recognizes that delays might develop at St. Thomas 
following the initial establishment of the Class C airspace area. 
However, those delays that do occur are typically transitional in 
nature. The FAA contends that any potential delays would eventually be 
more than offset by the increased flexibility afforded controllers in 
handling traffic as a result of Class C separation standards. This has 
been the experience at other Class C airspace areas.
    Aircraft operating in the vicinity of the proposed airspace already 
have a requirement for two-way radio communications capability and, 
therefore, would not be expected to incur any additional costs.
    If the proposed Class C airspace area becomes a final rule, 
operators would be subject to the Mode C Rule. That rule requires all 
aircraft to be equipped with an operable transponder with Mode C 
capability when operating in and above a Class C airspace area (up to 
10,000 feet mean sea level (MSL)). Some aircraft operators may have to 
acquire (or upgrade to) a Mode C transponder as a result of the 
proposed airspace. However, the cost of acquiring a Mode C transponder 
for all aircraft in the U.S was completely accounted for as a cost of 
the Mode C Rule.
    The FAA has also adopted regulations requiring certain aircraft 
operators to install Traffic Collision Avoidance System (TCAS), which 
allows air carriers to determine the position of other aircraft from 
the signal emitted by Mode C transponders. TCAS issues conflict 
resolution advisories as to what evasive actions are most appropriate 
for avoiding potential midair collisions. The TCAS Rule would not 
contribute to the potential costs of the proposed Class C airspace 
area, but it would contribute to the potential safety benefits. The 
benefits of the proposed St. Thomas Class C airspace area are discussed 
below.

Benefits

    The primary benefit of the proposed St. Thomas Class C airspace 
area would be enhanced aviation safety for the increasing number of 
passengers carrying aircraft transiting through this airspace. The 
volume of passenger enplanements at St. Thomas has risen dramatically. 
Enplanements in 1995 are projected to be 648,000, up from 491,000 in 
1990; by the year 2000, enplanements are projected to be 810,000. This 
high volume of passenger enplanements has made St. Thomas eligible to 
become a Class C airspace area. The complexity of aircraft operations 
at St. Thomas has also increased. Complexity refers to air traffic 
conditions resulting from a mix of controlled or uncontrolled aircraft 
(pilots that are not in contact with ATC) that vary widely in speed and 
maneuverability. As this mix increases, so does the potential for 
midair collisions.
    To study the effect that Class C airspace areas has on reducing 
this risk of midair collisions, the FAA looked at the occurrences of 
near-midair collisions (NMAC). In a study of NMAC data, the FAA's 
Office of Aviation Safety found that approximately 15 percent of 
reported NMAC's occur in airspace similar to that at St. Thomas. This 
study found that about half of all NMAC's occur in the 1,000- to 5,000-
foot altitude range, which is closely comparable to the altitudes where 
aircraft operate around airports that qualify for Class C airspace 
areas. This study also found that over 85 percent of NMAC's occur in 
visual flight rules (VFR) conditions when visibility is 5 miles or 
greater. Finally, the study found that the largest number of NMAC 
reports are associated with instrument flight rules (IFR) operators 
under radar control conflicting with VFR traffic during VFR flight 
conditions below 12,500 feet. The mandatory participation requirements 
of the Class C airspace area and the radar services provided by ATC to 
VFR as well as IFR pilots would help alleviate such conflicts.
    Ordinarily, the benefit of a reduction in the risk of midair 
collisions from establishing a Class C airspace area would be 
attributed entirely to establishing the proposed Class C airspace area. 
However, an indeterminate amount of the benefits has to be credited to 
the interaction of the proposed Class C airspace area (and the Class C 
airspace area program in general) with the Mode C Rule, which in turn, 
interacts with the TCAS Rule. The proposed Class C airspace area, as 
well as other designated airspace actions that require Mode C 
transponders, cannot be separated from the benefits of the Mode C and 
TCAS Rules. These four actions would share potential benefits totaling 
$4.4 billion.

Comparison of Costs and Benefits

    The proposed rule to establish a Class C airspace area at St. 
Thomas, VI, would impose a negligible cost of $600 on the agency. When 
this cost estimate of $600 is added to the total cost of establishing 
the other Mode-C-dependent airspace classes and the Mode C Rule and 
TCAS Rule, the costs would still be less than their total potential 
safety benefits. The proposal would also generate some benefits in the 
form of enhanced operational efficiency while imposing little, if any, 
additional operating costs on pilots who choose to remain clear of the 
proposed airspace. Thus, the FAA believes that the proposed rule would 
be cost-beneficial.

International Trade Impact Assessment

    The proposal would only affect U.S. terminal airspace operating 
procedures at and in the vicinity of St. Thomas, VI. The proposal would 
not impose a competitive trade disadvantage on foreign firms in the 
sale of either foreign [[Page 33155]] aviation products or services in 
the United States. In addition, domestic firms would not incur a 
competitive trade disadvantage in either the sale of United States 
aviation products or services in foreign countries.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Determination

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) was enacted by 
Congress to ensure that small entities are not unnecessarily and 
disproportionately burdened by government regulations. Small entities 
are independently owned and operated small businesses and small not-
for-profit organizations. The RFA requires agencies to review rules 
that may have ``a significant economic impact on a substantial number 
of small entities.''
    Under FAA Order 2100.14A entitled Regulatory Flexibility Criteria 
and Guidance, a significant economic impact means annualized net 
compliance cost to an entity, which when adjusted for inflation, is 
greater than or equal to the threshold cost level for that entity. A 
substantial number of small entities means a number that is eleven or 
more and is more than one-third the number of the small entities 
subject to a proposed or existing rule.
    For the purpose of this evaluation, the small entities that would 
be potentially affected by the proposed rule are fixed-base operators, 
flight schools, banner towing, seaplane shuttle bases, and other small 
aviation businesses located at and around St. Thomas. By using cutouts, 
special procedures, and Letters of Agreement between ATC and the 
affected parties, the FAA would make an effort to eliminate any adverse 
affect practicable on the operations of small entities in the vicinity 
of St. Thomas. The FAA has utilized such arrangements extensively in 
implementing other Class C airspace areas in the past. In addition, any 
delay problems that may initially develop following implementation 
would be transitory. This has been the experience at other Class C 
airspace areas. Thus, the proposed rule would not result in a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Federalism Implications

    The regulations adopted herein will not have substantial direct 
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national 
Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in 
accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this 
proposed rule would not have sufficient federalism implications to 
warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

Conclusion

    For the reasons discussed under ``Regulatory Evaluation,'' the FAA 
has determined that this rule (1) is not a ``significant regulatory 
action'' under Executive Order 12866; and (2) is not a ``significant 
rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; 
February 26, 1979). It is also certified that this rule does not 
require preparation of a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis under the RFA.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation 
Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 
9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389; 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 14 CFR 
11.69.


Sec. 71.1  [Amended]

    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal 
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9B, Airspace Designations and 
Reporting Points, dated July 18, 1994, and effective September 16, 
1994, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 4000  Subpart C--Class C Airspace

* * * * *

ASO VI C Charlotte Amalie St. Thomas, VI [New]

Cyril E. King Airport
    (lat. 18 deg.20'19'' N., long. 64 deg.58'11'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including 
4,000 feet MSL within 5-mile radius of the Cyril E. King Airport; 
and that airspace extending upward from 1,900 feet to 4,000 feet MSL 
within a 10-mile radius of the airport from the 075 deg. bearing 
from the airport clockwise to the 020 deg. bearing from the airport. 
This Class C airspace area is effective during the specific dates 
and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The 
effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in 
the Airport/Facility Directory.
* * * * *

Paragraph 5000  Subpart D--Class D Airspace

* * * * *
    ASO VI D Charlotte Amalie Cyril E. King Airport, St. Thomas, VI 
[Removed]
* * * * *
    Issued in Washington, DC, on June 12, 1995.
Harold W. Becker,
Manager, Airspace-Rules and Aeronautical Information Division.

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

[[Page 33156]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TP27JN95.000


[FR Doc. 95-15719 Filed 6-26-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-BC