[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 210 (Thursday, October 30, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 58694-58699]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-28753]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Airspace Docket No. 95-AWA-1]
RIN 2120-AA66


Proposed Modification of the Houston Class B Airspace Area; Texas

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This notice proposes to modify the Houston, TX, (IAH) Class B 
airspace area. Specifically, this action proposes to reconfigure two 
existing subarea boundaries and create an additional subarea within the 
Houston Class B airspace area. The FAA is proposing this action to 
enhance safety, reduce the potential for midair collision, and to 
better manage air traffic operations into, out of, and through the 
Houston Class B airspace area while accommodating the concerns of 
airspace users.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 1, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on the proposal in triplicate to the Federal 
Aviation Administration, Office of the

[[Page 58695]]

Chief Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket, AGC-200, Airspace Docket No. 
95-AWA-1, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591. The 
official docket may be examined in the Rules Docket, Office of the 
Chief Counsel, Room 916, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC, 
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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Sheri A. Edgett Baron, 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 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-1.'' 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 also 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, 800 Independence Avenue, 
SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling (202) 267-8783. Communications 
must identify the notice number of this NPRM. Persons interested in 
being placed on a mailing list for future NPRM's should call the FAA's 
Office of Rulemaking, (202) 267-9677, for a copy of Advisory Circular 
No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Distribution System, that 
describes the application procedure.

Background

    On December 17, 1991, the FAA published the Airspace 
Reclassification Final Rule (56 FR 65655). This rule discontinued the 
use of the term ``Terminal Control Area'' (TCA) and replaced it with 
the designation ``Class B airspace area.'' This change in terminology 
is reflected in this NPRM.
    The Class B airspace area program was developed to reduce the 
potential for midair collision in the congested airspace surrounding 
airports with high density air traffic by providing an area wherein all 
aircraft are subject to certain operating rules and equipment 
requirements.
    The density of traffic and the type of operations being conducted 
in the airspace surrounding major terminals increase the probability of 
midair collisions. In 1970, an extensive study found that the majority 
of midair collisions occurred between a general aviation (GA) aircraft 
and an air carrier or military aircraft, or another GA aircraft. The 
basic causal factor common to these conflicts was the mix of aircraft 
operating under visual flight rules (VFR) and aircraft operating under 
instrument flight rules (IFR). Class B airspace areas provide a method 
to accommodate the increasing number of IFR and VFR operations. The 
regulatory requirements of Class B airspace areas afford the greatest 
protection for the greatest number of people by giving air traffic 
control (ATC) increased capability to provide aircraft separation 
service, thereby minimizing the mix of controlled and uncontrolled 
aircraft.
    On May 21, 1970, the FAA published the Designation of Federal 
Airways, Controlled Airspace, and Reporting Points Final Rule (35 FR 
7782). This rule provided for the establishment of TCAs. To date, the 
FAA has established a total of 29 Class B airspace areas. The FAA is 
proposing to take action to modify or implement the application of 
these proven control areas to provide greater protection for air 
traffic in the airspace areas most commonly used by passenger-carrying 
aircraft.
    The standard configuration of a Class B airspace area contains 
three concentric circles centered on the primary airport extending to 
10, 20, and 30 nautical miles (NM), respectively. The standard vertical 
limits of the Class B airspace area normally should not exceed 10,000 
feet mean sea level (MSL), with the floor established at the surface in 
the inner area and at levels appropriate for the containment of 
operations in the outer areas. Variations of these criteria may be 
utilized contingent on the terrain, adjacent regulatory airspace, and 
factors unique to the terminal area.
    The coordinates for this airspace docket are based on North 
American Datum 83. Class B airspace areas are published in paragraph 
3000 of FAA Order 7400.9E, dated September 10, 1997, and effective 
September 16, 1997, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 
section 71.1. The Class B airspace area listed in this document would 
be published subsequently in the Order.

Related Rulemaking Actions

    On June 21, 1988, the FAA published the Transponder with Automatic 
Altitude Reporting Capability Requirement Final Rule (53 FR 23356). 
This rule requires all aircraft to have an altitude encoding 
transponder when operating within 30 NM of any designated TCA primary 
airport from the surface up to 10,000 feet MSL. This rule excluded 
those aircraft that were not originally certificated with an engine 
driven electrical system, (or those that have not subsequently been 
certified with such a system), balloons, or gliders.
    On October 14, 1988, the FAA published the TCA Classification and 
TCA Pilot and Navigation Equipment Requirements Final Rule (53 FR 
40318). This rule, in part, removed the different classifications of 
TCAs, and requires the pilot-in-command of a civil aircraft operating 
within a TCA to hold at least a private pilot certificate, except for a 
student pilot who has received certain documented training.

Pre-NPRM Public Input

    In June 1992, an ad hoc committee was formed, representing airspace 
users, to analyze the Houston Class B airspace area and develop 
recommendations for modifying the existing airspace design. The ad hoc 
committee met on several occasions and submitted written

[[Page 58696]]

recommendations for modifying the Houston Class B airspace area.
    As announced in the Federal Register on January 28, 1994 (59 FR 
4134), a pre-NPRM informal airspace meeting was held on April 19, 1994, 
in Pasadena, TX, to provide local airspace users an opportunity to 
present input on the design of the planned modifications of the Houston 
Class B airspace area.
    All comments received during the informal airspace meetings and the 
subsequent comment period were considered and incorporated, in part, in 
this NPRM. Verbal and written comments were received, and the FAA's 
findings are summarized below.

Analysis of Comments

    One commenter recommended realigning the existing 30 NM arc 
boundary east-southeast of the George Bush Intercontinental Airport 
(formerly Houston Intercontinental Airport), in the vicinity of the 
Baytown Airport, and R.W.J. Airpark.
    The FAA supports this recommendation and proposes to realign a 
portion of the east-southeast boundary of the Houston Class B airspace 
area defined as (a portion of) the Humble Very High Frequency 
Omnidirectional Range/Tactical Air Navigation (VORTAC) 30 NM arc, at 
the point where it intercepts Interstate 10 (I-10). From this point, 
the boundary would continue along the Humble VORTAC 30 NM arc until it 
intercepts the 20 NM arc of the Hobby Very High Frequency 
Omnidirectional Range/Distance Measuring Equipment (VOR/DME). In this 
area the FAA proposes to establish the floor at 4,000 feet MSL, to 
allow nonparticipating aircraft ingress and egress out of Bayton 
Airport and R.W.J. Airpark.
    Several commenters suggested that a portion of the surface area 
around William P. Hobby Airport and Ellington Airport be raised to 
support ingress and egress at Ellington Airport.
    The FAA does not agree with this suggestion because airspace down 
to the surface is necessary to protect for aircraft operations into and 
out of William P. Hobby Airport (the secondary airport of the Houston 
Class B airspace area). However, the FAA proposes to modify a portion 
of Area A around William P. Hobby Airport, by reconfiguring its eastern 
boundary and providing Ellington Airport approximately 1\1/2\-NM of 
additional airspace to its west. This would provide aircraft operators 
utilizing Ellington Airport additional airspace for operations into and 
out of Ellington Airport.
    In addition, the FAA proposes to create an additional subarea 
within the Houston Class B airspace area, southwest of William P. Hobby 
Airport, in the vicinity of Southwest Airport, and raise the subarea 
floor to 2,500 feet MSL. This proposed subarea would allow sufficient 
airspace for aircraft operations at Southwest Airport without entering 
the Class B airspace area.

The Proposal

    The FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 by modifying the Houston 
Class B airspace area. Specifically, this action proposes to 
reconfigure two existing subarea boundaries, and create an additional 
subarea within the existing Houston Class B airspace area in the 
vicinity southwest of the William P. Hobby Airport. The FAA is 
proposing this action to enhance safety, reduce the potential for 
midair collision, and to better manage air traffic operations into, out 
of, and through the Houston Class B airspace area while accommodating 
the concerns of airspace users. This proposal would realign a portion 
of the eastern boundary defined as the Humble VORTAC 30 NM arc, located 
east-southeast of Houston, in the vicinity of Bayton Airport and R.W.J. 
Airpark, where it intercepts I-10. The FAA proposes to continue the 
boundary along the Humble VORTAC 30 NM arc until it intercepts the 20 
NM arc of the Hobby VOR/DME. In addition to this realignment, the FAA 
proposes to expand the existing floor to 4,000 feet MSL in this area. 
The floor at 4,000 feet MSL would allow nonparticipating aircraft 
ingress and egress out of the Bayton Airport and R.W.J. Airpark.
    Additionally, the FAA proposes to reconfigure a portion of Area A 
around William P. Hobby Airport by reconfiguring its eastern boundary. 
This modification would provide aircraft operators utilizing Ellington 
Airport approximately 1 1/2-miles of additional airspace for aircraft 
operations west of Ellington Airport. Further, the FAA proposes to 
create a new subarea in the vicinity of Southwest Airport with a floor 
of 2,500 feet MSL. This modification would provide additional airspace 
for nonparticipating aircraft operating below the floor of the Houston 
Class B airspace area.
    Area A is unchanged except for the eastern boundary around William 
P. Hobby Airport and the change to the legal description of Area A. 
Area B remains unchanged except where the proposed modification aligns 
with Area A (around William P. Hobby Airport), and where it is proposed 
to create the additional subarea to the southwest of William P. Hobby 
Airport. Area C remains unchanged. Area D remains unchanged except in 
that area along the 30 NM arc east-southeast of Houston, in the 
vicinity of Bayton Airport and R.W.J. Airpark.

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 of 1980 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 international trade. In conducting 
these analyses, the FAA has determined that this NPRM: (1) would 
generate benefits that justify its 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; (4) would not constitute a 
barrier to international trade; and (5) would not contain any Federal 
intergovernmental or private sector mandate. Therefore, the 
requirements of Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 do 
not apply. These analyses are summarized here in the preamble and the 
full Regulatory Evaluation is in the docket.
    This draft Regulatory Evaluation analyzes the potential costs and 
benefits of the NPRM to amend 14 CFR part 71. The proposed rule would 
reconfigure two subareas and create an additional subarea within the 
Houston, TX, Class B airspace area. The proposal would reconfigure 
subarea A, expand subarea D, and establish a subarea E with a floor of 
2,500 feet MSL.
    The FAA has determined that aircraft operators would not incur any 
additional navigational or equipment costs as a result of the 
reconfiguration of subareas A and D or the establishment of the new 
subarea E. The proposed rule would establish lateral boundaries for 
subareas D and E. The FAA concludes that the reconfigured subarea D and 
the newly created subarea E are small in area, and would not impose any 
additional avionics equipment or circumnavigation cost onto operators. 
The reconfiguration of subarea A would move the lateral boundary inward 
(west), subsequently reducing the overall size of the subarea. The FAA 
contends that the reduction of

[[Page 58697]]

the subarea A lateral boundary may reduce circumnavigation cost for GA 
operations.
    This NPRM would not impose any additional administrative costs onto 
the FAA for personnel, facilities, or equipment. The modification of 
subareas A, D and E would only slightly expand the overall size of the 
Class B airspace area. This proposed action would provide additional 
ATC participation in subareas D and E with higher operations 
complexity, but would not expand the Class B airspace area lateral 
boundaries beyond the 30-NM arc.
    In view of the potential benefits of enhanced aviation safety and 
increased operational efficiency and the negligible cost of compliance, 
the FAA has determined that this 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 
regulatory agencies to review rules which may have ``a 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 FAA's criteria for a ``substantial number'' is a number that is 
not less than 11 and that is more than one third of the small entities 
subject to the NPRM. The small entities that could be potentially 
affected by implementation of this proposed rule are unscheduled 
operators of aircraft for hire owning nine or fewer aircraft.
    The FAA has determined that this NPRM would not have an adverse 
effect on a substantial number of small entities. This assessment is 
based on the premise that potentially impacted operators regularly fly 
into airports where radar approach control services have already been 
established. In addition, increasing the overall size of the Class B 
airspace area by such a small area would not impose any additional cost 
on circumnavigating operators for time and fuel. The FAA contends that 
the proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities, in view of the zero cost of 
compliance.
    The FAA has determined that this NPRM would not result in a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities; 
therefore, a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required under the 
terms of the RFA.

International Trade Impact Assessment

    The NPRM would neither constitute a barrier to international trade 
for the export of American goods and services to foreign countries, nor 
for the import of foreign goods and services into the United States. 
The NPRM would not impose costs on aircraft operators or aircraft 
manufacturers in the U.S. or foreign countries. The proposed 
modifications of the Houston Class B airspace area would only affect GA 
aircraft utilizing U.S. VFR procedures.

Unfunded Mandates Assessment

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (the Act), 
enacted as Pub. L. 104-4 on March 22, 1995, requires each Federal 
agency, to the extent permitted by law, to prepare a written assessment 
of the effects of any Federal mandate in a proposed or final agency 
rule that may result in the expenditure of $100 million or more 
adjusted annually for inflation in any one year by State, local, and 
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector. Section 
204(a) of the Act, 2 U.S.C. 1534(a), requires the Federal agency to 
develop an effective process to permit timely input by elected officers 
(or their designees) of State, local and tribal governments on a 
proposed ``significant intergovernmental mandate.'' A ``significant 
intergovernmental mandate'' under the Act is any provision in a Federal 
agency regulation that would impose an enforceable duty upon State, 
local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, (of $100 million 
adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year. Section 203 of the 
Act, 203 U.S.C 1533, which supplements section 204(a), provides that 
before establishing any regulatory requirements that might 
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, the agency shall 
have developed a plan that among other things provides for notice to 
potentially affected small governments, if any, and for a meaningful 
and timely opportunity to provide input in the development of 
regulatory proposals.
    This proposed rule does not contain any Federal intergovernmental 
mandates, but does contain a private sector mandate. However, because 
expenditures by the private sector will not exceed $100 million 
annually, the requirements of Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act of 1995 do not apply.

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--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, CLASS B, CLASS C, CLASS D, AND 
CLASS E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIRWAYS; ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

    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.


Sec. 71.1  [Amended]

    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal 
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9E, Airspace Designations and 
Reporting Points, dated September 10, 1997, and effective September 16, 
1997, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 3000  Subpart B--Class B Airspace

* * * * *

ASW TX B Houston, TX [Revised]

George Bush Intercontinental Airport (IAH) (Primary Airport)
    (Lat. 29 deg.58'50'' N., long. 95 deg.20'23'' W.)
William P. Hobby Airport (Secondary Airport)
    (Lat. 29 deg.38'44'' N., long. 95 deg.16'44'' W.)
Ellington Field
    (Lat. 29 deg.36'27'' N., long. 95 deg.09'32'' W.)
Humble VORTAC (IAH)
    (Lat. 29 deg.57'25'' N., long. 95 deg.20'45'' W.)
Hobby VOR/DME (HUB)
    (Lat. 29 deg.39'01'' N., long. 95 deg.16'45'' W.)

Boundaries

    Area A. That airspace extending upward from the surface to and 
including 10,000 feet MSL bounded by a line beginning at the 
intersection of the Humble VORTAC 8-mile arc and the 090 deg. 
radial; thence clockwise along the Humble VORTAC 8-mile arc to the 
Humble VORTAC 069 deg. radial; thence east along the Humble VORTAC 
069 deg. radial to the 10-mile arc of Humble VORTAC; thence 
clockwise along the 10-mile arc to the Humble VORTAC 090 deg. 
radial; thence west to the point of beginning; and that airspace 
bounded by a line beginning at lat. 29 deg.45'37'' N., long. 
95 deg.21'58'' W.; to lat. 29 deg.45'46'' N., long. 95 deg.11'47'' 
W.; thence clockwise along the Hobby VOR/DME 8-mile DME arc to 
intercept the Hobby VOR/DME 056 deg. radial; thence southwest along 
the Hobby VOR/DME 056 deg. radial to the 5.1 NM fix, thence direct 
to the Hobby VOR/DME 131 deg./005.8 NM fix; thence southeast along 
the Hobby VOR/DME 131 deg. radial to intercept the Hobby VOR/DME 7 
NM arc; thence clockwise on the 7 NM arc to the Hobby VOR/DME 
156 deg. radial; thence north along the Hobby VOR/DME 156 deg. 
radial to the Hobby VOR/DME 6-mile fix; thence clockwise along the 
Hobby VOR/DME 6 NM arc to the Hobby VOR/DME 211 deg. radial;

[[Page 58698]]

thence south along the Hobby VOR/DME 211 deg. radial to the Hobby 
VOR/DME 8-mile arc clockwise to the point of beginning.
    Area B. That airspace extending upward from 2,000 feet MSL to 
and including 10,000 feet MSL bounded by a line beginning at the 
intersection of State Highway 59 (SH 59) and the Hobby VOR/DME 15-
mile arc; thence counterclockwise along the Hobby VOR/DME 15-mile 
arc to the intersection of the Hobby VOR/DME 15-mile arc and the 
Humble VORTAC 15-mile arc; thence counterclockwise along the Humble 
VORTAC 15-mile arc to the intersection of the Humble VORTAC 15-mile 
arc and Westheimer Road lat. 29 deg.44'07'' N., long. 95 deg.28'47'' 
W.; thence southwest to and along SH 59 to the point of beginning, 
excluding Areas A, C and E.
    Area C. That airspace extending upward from 3,000 feet MSL to 
and including 10,000 feet MSL bounded by a line beginning at the 
intersection of SH 59 and the Humble VORTAC 20-mile DME arc; thence 
clockwise along the Humble VORTAC 20-mile DME arc to the 
intersection of the Humble VORTAC 20-mile DME arc and Interstate 10 
(I-10), west on I-10 to the Hobby VOR/DME 15-mile arc; thence 
counterclockwise along the Hobby VOR/DME 15-mile arc to the Humble 
VORTAC 15-mile DME arc; thence counterclockwise along the Humble 
VORTAC 15-mile DME arc to the intersection of the Humble VORTAC 15 
NM DME arc and Westheimer Road; thence southwest to and along SH 59 
to the point of beginning; and that airspace beginning at the 
intersection of the Hobby VOR/DME 15-mile arc and 156 deg. radial; 
thence north along the Hobby VOR/DME 156 deg. radial to the Hobby 
VOR/DME 10-mile arc clockwise along the Hobby VOR/DME 10-mile arc to 
the Hobby VOR/DME 211 deg. radial; thence south along the Hobby VOR/
DME 211 deg. radial to intersect the 15-mile arc to the point of 
beginning.
    Area D. That airspace extending upward from 4,000 feet MSL to 
and including 10,000 feet MSL bounded by a line beginning at the 
intersection of SH 59 and the Humble VORTAC 30-mile DME arc; thence 
clockwise along the Humble VORTAC 30-mile DME arc to the 
intersection of the Humble VORTAC 30 NM arc and the Hobby VOR/DME 20 
NM arc; thence clockwise along the Hobby VOR/DME 20-mile arc to SH 
59; thence southwest on SH 59 to the point of beginning, excluding 
Areas B, C, and E.
    Area E. That airspace extending upward from 2,500 feet MSL to 
and including 10,000 feet MSL bounded by a line beginning at the 
intersection of the Hobby VOR/DME 15 NM arc and State Road 6 (SR 6); 
thence southeast along SR 6 to the intersection of Farm Road 521 (FR 
521); thence south along FR 521 to the intersection of the Hobby 
VOR/DME 15 NM arc; thence counterclockwise along the Hobby VOR/DME 
15 NM arc to the point of the beginning.
* * * * *
    Issued in Washington, DC, on October 22, 1997.
Reginald C. Matthews,
Acting Program Director for Air Traffic Airspace Management.
    Note: This Appendix will not appear in the Code of Federal 
Regulations.

Appendix--Houston, TX, Class B Airspace Area

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

[[Page 58699]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP30OC97.000


[FR Doc. 97-28753 Filed 10-29-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-C