[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