[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 17 (Monday, January 27, 2003)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 3837-3841]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-1313]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2002-13514; Airspace Docket No. 02-AWA-4]
RIN 2120-AA66


Proposed Establishment of Class C Airspace and Revocation of 
Class D Airspace, Fayetteville (Springdale), Northwest Arkansas 
Regional Airport; AR

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This notice proposes to establish a Class C airspace area and 
revoke the existing Class D airspace area at the Northwest Arkansas 
Regional Airport (XNA), Fayetteville (Springdale), AR. The FAA is 
proposing this action due to the increase in aircraft operations at XNA 
and the potential for a midair collision between aircraft arriving and 
departing XNA and other aircraft operating close to the existing Class 
D airspace area. The establishment of this Class C airspace area would 
require pilots to establish and maintain two-way radio communications 
with air traffic control (ATC) and operate with an altitude encoding 
transponder while in and above the Class C airspace area. The FAA is 
taking this action to promote the efficient use of airspace, and reduce 
the risk of midair collision in the northwest Arkansas terminal area.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 13, 2003.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the Docket Management 
System, U.S. Department of Transportation, Room Plaza 401, 400 Seventh 
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20591-0001. You must identify the docket 
numbers FAA-2002-13514/Airspace Docket No. 02-AWA-4, at the beginning 
of your comments.
    You may also submit comments on the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov. 
You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any comments 
received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets Office 
between 9

[[Page 3838]]

a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The 
Docket Office (telephone number: 1-800-647-5527) is on the plaza level 
of the Department of Transportation NASSIF Building at the above 
address.
    An informal docket may also be examined during normal business 
hours at the office of the Regional Air Traffic Division, Federal 
Aviation Administration, 2601 Meacham Blvd; Fort Worth, TX 76193-0500.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Rohring, 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 both docket numbers 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 Docket No. FAA-2002-13514/
Airspace Docket No. 02-AWA-4.'' 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

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the 
Internet at http://dms.dot.gov. Recently published rulemaking documents 
can also be accessed through the FAA web page at http://www.faa.gov or 
the Superintendent of Document's web page at http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara.
    Additionally, any person may obtain a copy of this notice by 
submitting a request to the Federal Aviation Administration, Office of 
Air Traffic Airspace Management, ATA-400, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., 
Washington, DC 20591, or by calling (202) 267-8783. Communications must 
identify both docket numbers for this notice. 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, which 
describes the application procedure.

Background

    In November of 1998, XNA commenced operation. The airport is a 
public-use facility that is serviced by a radar approach control 
located at Fort Smith, AR, and a non-Federal airport traffic control 
tower. XNA currently has a Class D airspace area. The number of 
enplanements for XNA has increased and now exceeds the FAA criteria for 
Class C airspace area candidacy. A study of aircraft operations in the 
area has revealed that the proximity of XNA to seven other airports 
within a 20-nautical-mile radius and the current flight paths of 
aircraft operating in the Northwest Arkansas terminal area has 
increased the potential for a midair collision. With the current Class 
D airspace area, aircraft operating in the Northwest Arkansas terminal 
area may fly as close as 4.4 nautical miles from XNA without 
communicating with ATC. Additionally, these aircraft are frequently 
operating at altitudes that may conflict with aircraft arriving or 
departing XNA. Establishment of a Class C airspace area would reduce 
the potential for midair collisions and increase the level of safety in 
the Northwest Arkansas terminal area by requiring aircraft to establish 
and maintain 2-way radio communication with ATC when operating in the 
proposed Class C airspace area, and to operate with an altitude 
encoding transponder when in and above the proposed area.

Public Input

    In January, 2001, the FAA held three informal airspace meetings in 
the Northwest Arkansas area to solicit public input regarding the 
planned establishment of a Class C airspace area. Additionally, an ad 
hoc committee was formed and met during May and June, 2001. The 
information received during the informal airspace meetings and the 
recommendations made by the ad hoc committee were considered and formed 
the basis for designing the proposed Class C airspace area.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to part 71 of the Federal 
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 71) to establish a Class C airspace 
area and revoke the existing Class D airspace area at XNA. The FAA is 
proposing this action due to an increase in aircraft operations in the 
Northwest Arkansas terminal area. The establishment of this proposed 
Class C airspace area would require pilots to maintain two-way radio 
communications with ATC when operating in a Class C airspace area and 
to operate with an altitude encoding transponder while in or above the 
Class C airspace. Implementation of the proposed Class C airspace area 
would promote the safe and efficient use of airspace, and reduce the 
risk of midair collision in the Northwest Arkansas terminal area.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an 
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and 
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. 
Therefore, this proposed action: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory 
action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' 
under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation 
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter 
that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is 
certified that this proposed rule, when promulgated, will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The coordinates for this airspace docket are based on North 
American Datum 83. Class C airspace designations are published in 
paragraph 4000 of FAA Order 7400.9K, dated August 30, 2002, and 
effective September 16, 2002, 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.

Regulatory Evaluation Summary

    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

[[Page 3839]]

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 proposed rule is not ``a 
significant regulatory action'' as defined in the Executive Order and 
the Department of Transportation Regulatory Policies and Procedures. 
This proposed rule would not have a significant impact on a substantial 
number of small entities, would not constitute a barrier to 
international trade, and does not contain any Federal intergovernmental 
or private sector mandate. These analyses, available in the docket, are 
summarized below.
    The proposed rule would revoke the Class D airspace area currently 
surrounding the Northwest Arkansas Regional Airport and establish a 
Class C airspace area there. The FAA would incur costs of approximately 
$500 in order to send a ``Letter To Airmen'' to pilots within a 50-mile 
radius of the Northwest Arkansas Regional Airport informing them of the 
airspace change. The FAA would not incur any other costs for air 
traffic control staffing, training, or equipment. Changes to sectional 
charts would occur during the chart cycle and would cause no additional 
costs beyond the normal update of the charts. Any public meeting and 
safety seminar would not result in costs to the aviation community 
because they would occur regardless of this final rule. Aircraft owners 
and operators would incur minimal equipment costs to operate in the 
Class C airspace area. Most of the air traffic comes from a mix of air 
taxi and commuter aircraft. These aircraft should already have the 
necessary equipment to transition Class C airspace area.
    The FAA contends that establishing the Class C airspace area 
surrounding the Northwest Arkansas Regional Airport would increase the 
level of safety for the operations that occur at the airport. 
Therefore, the FAA has determined that the proposed rule would be cost-
beneficial.

Final Regulatory Flexibility Determination

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 establishes ``as a principle 
of regulatory issuance that agencies shall endeavor, consistent with 
the objective of the rule and of applicable statutes, to fit regulatory 
and informational requirements to the scale of the business, 
organizations, and governmental jurisdictions subject to regulation.'' 
To achieve that principal, the Act requires agencies to solicit and 
consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain the rational for 
their actions. The Act covers a wide-range of small entities, including 
small businesses, not-for-profit organizations and small governmental 
jurisdictions.
    Agencies must perform a review to determine whether a proposed or 
final rule will have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. If the determination is that it will, the 
agency must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis (RFA) as 
described in the Act.
    However, if an agency determines that a proposed or final rule is 
not expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities, section 605(b) of the 1980 act provides that 
the head of the agency may so certify and an RFA is not required. The 
certification must include a statement providing the factual basis for 
this determination, and the reasoning should be clear.
    All commercial and most general aviation (GA) operators who 
presently use the Northwest Arkansas Airport should be currently 
equipped to use the Class C airspace area. Though it is currently 
surrounded by Class D airspace, most of its air traffic comes from air 
taxi and commuter aircraft. These aircraft already have the necessary 
equipment to transition Class C airspace area. Those GA operators who 
currently transit the Northwest Arkansas terminal area without Mode C 
transponders can circumnavigate the Northwest Arkansas Class C airspace 
area at negligible cost, without significantly deviating from their 
regular flight paths. Accordingly, pursuant to the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), the Federal Aviation Administration 
has determined that this propose rule would not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The FAA 
solicits comments from the general aviation community and other 
interested parties. All commenters are asked to provide documented 
information in support of their comments.

International Trade Impact Analysis

    This proposed rule is a domestic airspace rulemaking and would not 
constitute a barrier to international trade, including the export of 
U.S. goods and services to foreign countries or the import of foreign 
goods and services into the United States.

Unfunded Mandates Assessment

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (the Act), 
enacted as Public Law 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 (when 
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, 2 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, which, among other things, must provide for 
notice to potentially affected small governments, if any, and for a 
meaningful and timely opportunity for those small governments to 
provide input in the development of regulatory proposals.
    This proposed rule does not contain any Federal intergovernmental 
or private sector mandates. Therefore, the requirements of Title II of 
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 do not apply.
    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (the Act), 
enacted as Public Law 0104-4 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 (when 
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

[[Page 3840]]

``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, 2 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, which, among other things, must 
provide for notice to potentially affected small governments, if any, 
and for a meaningful and timely opportunity for these small governments 
to provide input in the development of regulatory proposals.
    This proposed rule does not contain any Federal intergovernmental 
or private sector mandates. Therefore, 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 FAA Order 
7400.9K, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 30, 
2002, and effective September 16, 2002, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 4000--Subpart C--Class C Airspace

* * * * *

ASW AR C Northwest Arkansas Regional Airport, AR [New]

Northwest Arkansas Regional Airport, AR
    (Lat. 36[deg]16'55'' N., long. 94[deg]18'25'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including 
5,300 feet MSL within a 5-mile radius of the Northwest Arkansas 
Regional Airport, excluding that airspace from lat. 36[deg]21'06'' 
N., long. 94[deg]15'03'' W.; to lat. 36[deg]15'30'' N., long. 
94[deg]12'28'' W.; and that airspace extending upward from 2,500 
feet MSL to and including 5,300 feet MSL within a 10-mile radius of 
the Northwest Arkansas Regional Airport excluding that airspace from 
lat. 36[deg]26'53'' N., long. 94[deg]17'42'' W.; to lat. 
36[deg]09'43'' N., long. 94[deg]09'49'' W.; and that airspace 
extending upward from 2,900 feet MSL to and including 5,300 feet MSL 
within a 10-mile radius of the Northwest Arkansas Regional Airport 
from lat. 36[deg]26'53'' N., long. 94[deg]17'42'' W.; thence 
clockwise on the 10-mile radius of the airport to lat. 
36[deg]09'43'' N., long. 94[deg]09'49'' W. 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

* * * * *

ASW AR D Fayettville (Springdale), Northwest Arkansas Regional Airport, 
AR [Removed]

* * * * *


    Issued in Washington, DC, on January 13, 2003.
Reginald C. Matthews,
Manager, Airspace and Rules Division.

[[Page 3841]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JA03.000

[FR Doc. 03-1313 Filed 1-24-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P