[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 164 (Thursday, August 22, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 43320-43324]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21479]


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


DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 71

[Airspace Docket No. 95-AWA-6]


Proposed Establishment of Myrtle Beach International Airport 
Class C Airspace Area, SC; and Revocation of the Myrtle Beach AFB Class 
D Airspace Area; South Carolina

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 Myrtle Beach 
International Airport, Myrtle Beach, SC. The Myrtle Beach International 
Airport is a public-use facility with a Level II control tower served 
by a 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 use of air 
traffic and reduce the risk of midair collision in the terminal area.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 22, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on the proposal in triplicate to: Federal 
Aviation Administration, Office of the Chief Counsel, Attention: Rules 
Docket, AGC-200, Airspace Docket No. 95-AWA-6, 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 
Rules Division, ATA-400, Office of Air Traffic Airspace Management, 
Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., 
Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-8783.

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

[[Page 43321]]

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-6.'' 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 Air Traffic Airspace Management, Attention: Airspace and 
Rules Division, ATA-400, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 
20591, or by calling (202) 267-3075. Communications must identify the 
notice number of this NPRM. Persons interested in being placed on a 
mailing list for future NPRM's should contact the Federal Aviation 
Administration, Office of Rulemaking, (202) 267-9677, to 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 
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, l985, issued a 
final rule (50 FR 9252; March 6, l985) 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, 
l985). 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 Myrtle Beach International Airport is a public-use airport with 
an operating Level II control tower served by Radar Approach Control. 
The FAA assumed responsibility from the U.S. Air Force, for providing 
air traffic services at the airport in December 1992. The number of 
general aviation and air taxi aircraft operating in the terminal 
environment at Myrtle Beach International Airport is increasing. The 
volume of passenger enplanements reported at Myrtle Beach International 
Airport were 316,809, 274,531, and 290,295, respectively, for calendar 
years 1994, 1993, and 1992. Myrtle Beach International Airport 
qualifies as a Class C airspace candidate based on the volume of 
enplaned passengers.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal 
Regulations (14 CFR part 71) to establish a Class C airspace area at 
the Myrtle Beach International Airport and revoke the Class D airspace 
area at the Myrtle Beach AFB, SC. Myrtle Beach International Airport is 
a public airport with a Level II operating control tower served by a 
Radar Approach Control.
    The FAA previously has published a final rule (50 FR 9252; March 6, 
l985) that 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, 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 section 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

[[Page 43322]]

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 1,200 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.
    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 
7400.9C dated August 17, 1995, and effective September 16, 1995, 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

    Proposed changes to Federal regulations must undergo several 
economic analyses. First, Executive Order 12866 directs that each 
Federal agency shall propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned 
determination that the benefits of the intended regulation justify its 
costs. Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act requires agencies to 
analyze the economic effect of regulatory changes on small entities. 
Third, the Office of Management and Budget directs agencies to assess 
the effect of regulatory changes on small entities changes on 
international trade. In conducting these analyses, the FAA has 
determined that this NPRM: (1) would generate benefits that justify its 
minimal costs and is not ``a significant regulatory action'' as defined 
in the Executive Order; (2) is not significant as defined in Department 
of Transportation's Regulatory Policies and Procedures; (3) would not 
have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities; 
and (4) would not constitute a barrier to international trade. These 
analyses are summarized below in the docket.

Cost-Benefit Analysis

    The FAA has determined the proposed establishment of the Myrtle 
Beach Class C airspace area would enhance operational efficiency 
(through the promotion of additional ATC operating procedures) and 
aviation safety (in the form of reduced risk of midair collision in the 
proposed Class C airspace area).

Costs

    Those potential cost components (navigational equipment for 
aircraft operators and operations support equipment for the FAA, 
including additional cost for air traffic controllers) that could be 
imposed by the proposed rule are discussed as follows:

Cost Impact on Aircraft Operators

    Aircraft operators would incur minimal, if any, cost with 
compliance from the proposed rule. The assessment is based on the most 
recent General Aviation and Avionics Survey Report. The report 
indicates an estimated 82 percent of all General Aviation (GA) aircraft 
operators are already equipped with two-way radios that are required to 
enter Class C airspace. As of December 30, 1990, all aircraft (except 
those without an electrical system, balloons and gliders) flying in the 
vicinity of the Myrtle Beach Airport have been required to have a Mode 
C transponder under Federal Aviation Regulations (14 part 91.215). The 
FAA has traditionally accommodated GA aircraft operators without two-
way radio communication equipment and operators of aircraft without 
electrical systems, via ATC authorized deviations or letters of 
agreement, when practical to do so without jeopardizing aviation 
safety. There would be no additional cost for transponder equipage, as 
a result of the proposed rule, because the regulatory evaluation 
prepared for the Mode C transponders rule estimated the cost of such 
equipment for the affected operators. Not all GA aircraft operators may 
receive authorized deviations or letters of agreement, these operators 
would be required to circumnavigate the Class C airspace area. The FAA 
has determined operators could circumnavigate around the proposed 
airspace (5 miles), over, or in certain cases, under the proposed 
airspace without significantly deviating from their regular flight 
paths. Therefore, the FAA has determined the proposed rule would impose 
minimal, if any, cost impact on aircraft operators.

Cost Impact on the FAA

    The FAA assumed responsibility for ATC at the Myrtle Beach AFB from 
the United States Air Force on December 27, 1992. In that same year, a 
review of the radar system at Myrtle Beach was conducted. As a result 
of that review, the FAA decided to expedite the replacement of the 
computer system in conjunction with the radar scope. Myrtle Beach AFB 
installed a new computer system, after the FAA's 1992 review; 
therefore, the agency would not incur any additional cost for equipment 
(such as consoles) with the proposed establishment of Class C airspace. 
The proposed Class C airspace area would also be able to function 
effectively with existing personnel resources. Once an NPRM becomes 
final, the FAA distributes a Letter to Airmen to pilots residing within 
50 miles of the proposed established Class C airspace area. This one-
time incurred cost of the established rule would be approximately $535. 
The FAA systematically revises sectional charts every 6 months; 
therefore, the proposed rule would not impose any additional charting 
costs to the agency. 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. The FAA 
recognizes that delays might develop at Myrtle Beach 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 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. Thus, the FAA has determined that the Myrtle Beach 
facility is already equipped with the necessary personnel, capability, 
and equipment to provide

[[Page 43323]]

Class C services to the maximum extent at minimal cost.

Benefits

    Those potential benefit components (enhanced aviation safety and 
operational efficiency) that are expected to be generated by the 
proposed rule are discussed as follows:

Impact on Aviation Safety

    The proposed rule would enhance aviation safety. The enhancement in 
aviation safety would be in the form of a reduced probability of midair 
collisions. The FAA has increased the controlled airspace around Myrtle 
Beach, due to the increase in passenger enplanements and complexity of 
operations in that area. The enhancement to aviation safety is based on 
the fact that the proposed rule would impose equipment (i.e., two-way 
radio and Mode C transponders) and operational requirements (i.e., 
separation procedures and safety alerts) on aircraft operators in the 
proposed Class C airspace area. The FAA Office of Aviation Safety 
conducted a study of the occurrences of near-midair collisions (NMAC), 
the byproduct of the study, was that 15 percent of reported NMAC's 
occur in airspace similar to that at Myrtle Beach.

Impact on Operational Efficiency

    The proposed rule would enhance aircraft operational efficiency. 
This assessment is based on the enhancement in operational efficiency 
that would accrue from increased operational requirements in the 
proposed Class C airspace area. Aircraft operators in this type of 
airspace would receive additional information in the form of traffic 
advisories and separation and sequencing of arrivals. The proposed rule 
would not have an adverse impact on satellite airports located within 
the surface area of the Class C airspace area.

Conclusion

    In view of the minimal cost of compliance, enhanced aviation safety 
and operational efficiency, the FAA has determined that the proposed 
rule would be cost-beneficial.

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 Federal regulations. The RFA requires a 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis if a proposed rule would have 
``significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities.'' FAA Order 2100.14A outlines the FAA's procedures and 
criteria for implementing the RFA.
    The small entities that may potentially incur minimal, if any, cost 
with the implementation of the proposed rule are operators of aircraft 
who do not meet Class C navigational equipment standards (primarily 
parts 91, 121 and 135 aircraft without two-way radios and Mode C 
transponders). The small entities potentially impacted by the proposed 
rule would not incur any additional cost for navigational equipment and 
more stringent operating procedures because they routinely fly into 
airspace where such requirements are already in place. As the result of 
the Mode C rule, all of these commercial operators are assumed to have 
Mode C transponders. The FAA has traditionally accommodated GA and 
other aircraft operators without two-way radio communication equipment 
and Mode C transponders, via letters of agreement, when practical to do 
so without jeopardizing safety. Therefore, the FAA has determined that 
the proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities.

International Trade Impact Assessment

    The proposed rule would not constitute a barrier to international 
trade, including the export of American goods and services to foreign 
countries and the import of foreign goods and services into the United 
States. This assessment is based on the fact that the proposed rule 
would neither impose costs on aircraft operators nor aircraft 
manufacturers (U.S. or foreign).

Federalism Implications

    The regulations adopted herein will not have substantial direct 
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national 
Government and 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.

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


Sec. 71.1  [Amended]

    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal 
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9C, Airspace Designations and 
Reporting Points, dated August 17, 1995, and effective September 16, 
1995, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 4000--Subpart C--Class C Airspace

* * * * *

ASO SC C Myrtle Beach, SC [New]

Myrtle Beach International Airport
(Lat. 33 deg.40'47'' N., long. 78 deg.55'42'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including 
4,000 feet MSL within a 5-mile radius of the Myrtle Beach 
International Airport, and that airspace extending upward from 1,200 
feet MSL to and including 4,000 feet MSL within a 10-mile radius of 
the Myrtle Beach International Airport. This Class C airspace area 
is effective during the specific dates and times of operation of the 
Myrtle Beach Approach Control facility, as established in advance by 
a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and times will thereafter be 
continuously published in Airport/Facility Directory.
* * * * *

Paragraph 5000--Subpart D--Class D Airspace

* * * * *

ASO SC D Myrtle Beach AFB, SC [Removed]

* * * * *
    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 15, 1996.
Jeff Griffith,
Program Director for Air Traffic Airspace Management.

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

[[Page 43324]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN22AU96.000



[FR Doc. 96-21479 Filed 8-21-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-C