[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 39 (Thursday, February 27, 2003)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 9496-9498]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-4495]



[[Page 9495]]

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

Part IV





Department of Transportation





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



Federal Aviation Administration



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



14 CFR Part 93



Modification of the Dimensions of the Grand Canyon National Park 
Special Flight Rules Area and Flight Free Zones; Final Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 39 / Thursday, February 27, 2003 / 
Rules and Regulations  

[[Page 9496]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 93

Docket No. FAA-2001-8690
RIN 2120-AG74


Modification of the Dimensions of the Grand Canyon National Park 
Special Flight Rules Area and Flight Free Zones

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: On April 4, 2000, the FAA published two final rules regarding 
commercial air tour operations over Grand Canyon National Park (GCNP). 
The first rule, Commercial Air Tour Limitation in Grand Canyon National 
Park Special Flight Rules Area, limited the number of commercial air 
tour operations that may be flown in the GCNP Special Flight Rules Area 
(SFRA) on an annual basis. This rule became effective on May 4, 2000. 
The second rule, Modification of the Dimensions of the Grand Canyon 
National Park Special Flight Rules Area and Flight Free Zones, modified 
the airspace in the SFRA to accommodate a new route system for 
commercial air tour operations and to expand the amount of overall 
airspace protected by flight free zones. This rule initially was 
scheduled to become effective December 1, 2000. After several delays, 
the new routes and airspace were adopted for the west end of the GCNP 
SFRA on April 19, 2001. The routes and airspace on the east end of the 
GCNP SFRA have been delayed several times since the adoption of the 
final rule. In December 2001, the FAA delayed the east end routes and 
airspace until February 20, 2003. This rule stays 14 CFR 93.305 (a) and 
(b) of the Airspace Modification Final Rule for the east end of the 
GCNP until February 20, 2006.

DATES: Effective February 20, 2003, 14 CFR 93.305 (a) and (b) are 
stayed until February 20, 2006. This rule was originally published at 
61 FR 69330 on December 31, 1996, and amended April 4, 2000 (65 FR 
17736).

ADDRESSES: You may view a copy of this final rule, Modification of the 
Dimensions of the Grand Canyon National Park Special Flight Rules Area 
and Flight Free Zones, through the Internet at: http://dms.dot.gov. You 
may also review the public dockets on this regulation in person in the 
Docket Office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except 
Federal holidays. The Docket Office is on the plaza level of the Nassif 
Building at the Department of Transportation, 400 7th St., SW., Room 
401, Washington, DC 20590.
    As an alternative, you may search the Federal Register's Internet 
site at http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs for access to this final 
rule.
    You may also request a paper copy of this final rule from the 
Office of Rulemaking, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence 
Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling (202) 267-9680.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kent Stephens, Flight Standards 
Service, (AFS-200) Federal Aviation Administration, Seventh and 
Maryland Streets, SW., Washington, DC 20591; Telephone: (202) 267-7493.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

    The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 
1996 requires FAA to comply with small entity requests for information 
or advice about compliance with statutes and regulations within its 
jurisdiction. Therefore, any small entity that has a question regarding 
this document may contact their local FAA official, or the person 
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. You can find out more 
about SBRFA on the Internet at our site, http://www.gov/avr/arm/sbrefa.htm. For more information on SBREFA, e-mail us [email protected].

Background

    On April 4, 2000, the Federal Aviation Administration published two 
final rules, the Modification of the Dimensions of the Grand Canyon 
National Park Special Flight Rules Area and Flight Free Zones (Airspace 
Modification), and the Commercial Air Tour Limitation in the Grand 
Canyon National Park Special Flight Rules Area (Commercial Air Tour 
Limitation). See 65 FR 17736; 65 FR 17708; April 4, 2000. The FAA also 
published concurrently a notice of availability of Commercial Routes 
for the Grand Canyon National Park (Routes Notice). See 65 FR 17698, 
April 4, 2000. The Commercial Air Tour Limitations final rule was 
implemented, effective May 4, 2000. The Airspace Modification final 
rule and the routes set forth in the Notice of Availability were 
scheduled to become effective December 1, 2000. The Final Supplemental 
Environmental Assessment for Special Flight Rules in the Vicinity of 
Grand Canyon National Park (SEA) was completed on February 22, 2000, 
and the Finding of No Significant Impact was issued on February 25, 
2000.
    Following the publication of the final rules, the United States Air 
Tour Association and seven air tour operators petitioned the United 
States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia to review the 
rules. See USATA v. FAA, et. al. (Docket No. 00-1201). During the 
course of this litigation, the USATA raised new safety concerns 
regarding the new routes in the east end of the GCNP SFRA. As a result, 
the FAA first delayed implementation of the routes until December 28, 
2000 (November 20, 2000; 65 FR 69848) so that it could evaluate the new 
issues. During this evaluation, the FAA determined that modifications 
could be made to the routes to enhance safety. On December 13, 2000, 
the FAA published a second Notice of Availability seeking comment on 
proposed changes to routes in the east-end of the GCNP SFRA (65 FR 
78071). Subsequently, the FAA delayed the implementation of the routes 
until April 1, 2001. (66 FR 2001, January 4, 2001).
    During the comment period for the second Notice of Availability, 
additional safety concerns were raised regarding the proposed revisions 
to the east end routes. Consequently, the FAA decided to implement the 
modifications to the route structure of the GCNP SFRA in two phases. 
First, on April 19, 2001, the FAA implemented the routes and airspace 
in the west-end (defined as all areas of the SFRA west of the Dragon 
corridor) of the GCNP SFRA that originally were published on April 4, 
2000. Also, on April 19, 2001, the SFRA boundary in the eastern part of 
the GCNP SFRA over the Navajo Nation lands was extended five miles to 
the east. Second, the route structure on the east-end (Dragon Corridor 
and all airspace east of that Corridor) in the GCNP SFRA was stayed 
until December 1, 2001, to enable the FAA and NPS to determine what 
changes should be made in the east end of GCNP. In December 2001, the 
east end route structure was again stayed until February 20, 2003. (66 
FR 63293, December 5, 2001). Accordingly, the routes now flown remain 
almost exactly as that shown under Special Federal Aviation Regulation 
(SFAR) 50-2, with only slight modification to certain entry and exit 
points.
    In a case decided on August 16, 2002, (U.S. Air Tour Association, 
et al. v. Federal Aviation Administration, 298 F.3d 997), the U.S. 
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia concluded that the FAA's 
use of an ``average annual day'' in lieu of ``any given day,'' in

[[Page 9497]]

measuring substantial restoration of natural quiet at Grand Canyon 
National Park ``appears inconsistent with both the [National] Park 
Service's definition of the term and the premise on which that 
definition was based.'' The Court also determined that the FAA's 
explanation for excluding non-tour aircraft in its noise modeling was 
inadequate and that the FAA had not provided sufficient evidence to 
conclude that noise from non-tour aircraft did not impact the 
calculations of substantial restoration of natural quiet achieved in 
GCNP. The court remanded the matter to the FAA for further proceedings 
consistent with its opinion.
    Once the FAA obtains guidance from the NPS concerning the 
appropriate way to measure noise in the park and determines how to 
address non-air tour aircraft noise, the FAA and NPS will conduct the 
necessary environmental analysis and review process. FAA and NPS may 
initiate supplemental rulemaking to consider further modifications to 
the east-end routes and the west-end routes to achieve substantial 
restoration of natural quiet in the GCNP. The GCNP Noise Model 
Validation project has begun to yield data that suggests there may be a 
need to recalibrate the Integrated Noise Model (INM) for use in the 
GCNP. Recalibration of the INM would affect the determination of how 
much natural quiet has already been restored and the benefits of 
pursing the alternative of quiet technology and may warrant public 
notice and an opportunity for review and comment.
    Following a recent congressional hearing on Grand Canyon 
overflights, the FAA and NPS are also considering a dispute resolution 
process to assist in developing measures to fulfill the mandate under 
the National Park Overflights Act. Because this process is not 
complete, and, based on prior experience, we believe it could take 
several years to resolve all of the issues and complete the necessary 
environmental review and any additional rulemaking process, it is 
necessary to stay 14 CFR 93.305 (a) and (b) as they apply to the east 
end of GCNP until February 20, 2006. The FAA and the NPS will work to 
resolve the issues remanded by the court together with the issues 
surrounding the routes.
    The FAA notes that the changes to the routes and airspace in the 
west end of GCNP finalized in the April 2000 rule have been in effect 
since April 19, 2001. Those changes were implemented to further the 
goal of substantial restoration of natural quiet in GCNP.

Immediate Effective Date

    The FAA finds that good cause exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(d) for this 
final rule to become a final rule upon issuance. The FAA notes that the 
stay only affects the east end of the GCNP SFRA; changes to the west 
end have been in effect since April 19, 2001.

Environmental Review

    In March 2001, the FAA completed a written reevaluation (WR) of the 
February 22, 2000 Final Supplemental Environmental Assessment (FSEA) 
for Special flight rules in the Vicinity of Grand Canyon National Park 
(GCNP). The WR examined the potential environmental impacts associated 
with a phased implementation of the Airspace rule and the Commercial 
Air Tour Route Modifications described in the February 2000 FSEA. This 
phased approach involved implementation of the agency's ``preferred'' 
alternative for airspace and air tour route structures as described in 
the February 2000 FSEA for the GCNP SFRA west of Dragon Corridor. Since 
no changes to the western portion of the GCNP SFRA as described in the 
FSEA occurred, the impact evaluation for the ``preferred'' alternative 
contained in the FSEA remained valid for the stage-one airspace and 
routes implementation at the west-end of the GCNP SFRA. The WR also 
analyzed the planned implementation of the stage-one airspace, routes, 
and route modifications on the east-end and determined that they were 
not significant changes from the plans analyzed under the ``no action'' 
alternative in the February 2000 FSEA. Therefore, the FAA determined 
that the proposed route revisions to the SFAR 50-2 route structure 
conformed to the ``no action'' alternative analyzed in the FSEA. The 
FAA determined that the data and analyses contained in the February 
2000 FSEA were still substantially valid and all pertinent conditions 
and requirements of the prior approval have or would be met in the 
April 2001 action.
    While the stay of the east-end route and airspace structure lessens 
the percentage of the GCNP substantially restored to natural quiet, it 
is only a temporary delay. In addition, given that the majority of the 
revised routes and airspace for GCNP were implemented during phase one, 
the phased implementation process resulted in a gain of substantial 
restoration of natural quiet for GCNP as described in the February 2000 
FSEA.
    Therefore for the above reasons and pursuant to FAA Order 1050.1D, 
Paragraph 92, the FAA determined that the contents of the Final 
Supplemental Environmental Assessment and its conclusions issued on 
February 22, 2000 were still valid. Additionally, the FAA found that 
the previous Section 106 Determination of No Adverse Effect to 
Traditional Cultural Properties identified by Native Americans issued 
for the FSEA was also still valid. Copies of the written reevaluation 
were placed in the public docket for the April 2001 rulemaking, were 
circulated to interested parties, and were available for inspection at 
the same time and location as the April 2001 final rule. The findings 
of the March 2001 WR remain valid for this final rule staying the 
provisions of 14 CFR 93.305 (a) and (b).

Economic Analysis

    The economic analysis completed for the final rule published April 
4, 2000 evaluates the east-end and the west-end operations separately 
since these are distinct markets. This action does not affect the April 
19, 2001 implementation of the west-end airspace structure, and the 
economic analysis from the April 4, 2000 final rule remains valid. At 
this time the FAA is staying the implementation of the east-end routes. 
The FAA does not consider that this rulemaking effort imposes any costs 
on the public since it merely stays the provisions for the east end of 
GCNP. Commercial air tour operators will continue to use established 
air tour routes. Benefits from reduced aircraft noise in the east end 
of GCNP, however, will be delayed. This rulemaking is not a final 
action. If the agency takes a final action that is different than that 
published on April 4, 2000, then it may be necessary to complete a 
revised economic evaluation.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Determination and Assessment

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 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, organization, and government jurisdictions subject to 
regulation.'' To achieve that principle, the RFA requires agencies to 
solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain the 
rationale for their actions. The RFA 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

[[Page 9498]]

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 as described in the RFA. 
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 RFA provides that the head of 
the agency may so certify and a regulatory flexibility analysis is not 
required. The certification must include a statement providing the 
factual basis for this determination, and the reasoning should be 
clear.
    This final rule will have only a de minimus cost impact on the 
certificate holders. Accordingly, pursuant to the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), the Federal Aviation Administration 
certifies that this final rule will not have a significant impact on a 
substantial number of small entities.

International Trade Impact Assessment

    The Trade Agreement Act (TAA) of 1979 prohibits Federal agencies 
from engaging in any standards or related activities that create 
unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. 
Legitimate domestic objectives, such as safety, are not considered 
unnecessary obstacles. The TAA also requires consideration of 
international standards and where appropriate, that they be the basis 
for U.S. standards. In addition, consistent with the Administration's 
belief in the general superiority and desirability of free trade, it is 
the policy of the Administration to remove or diminish to the extent 
feasible, barriers to international trade, including both barriers 
affecting the export of American goods and services to foreign 
countries and barriers affecting the import of foreign goods and 
services into the United States. In accordance with the above Act and 
policy, the FAA has assessed the potential effect of this final rule 
and has determined that it will have only a domestic impact and 
therefore no effect on any trade-sensitive activity.

Federalism Implications

    This amendment will not have substantial direct effects on the 
states, on the relationship between the national government and the 
states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government. Therefore, in accordance with Executive 
Order 12612, it is determined that this amendment would not have 
sufficient Federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a 
Federalism Assessment.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    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 (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 these small governments to 
provide input in the development of regulatory proposals. The FAA has 
determined that this rule will not impose any unfunded mandates.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 93

    Air traffic control, Airports, Navigation (Air).

Adoption of Amendments

    Accordingly, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends 14 
CFR part 93 as follows:

PART 93--SPECIAL AIR TRAFFIC RULES AND AIRPORT TRAFFIC PATTERNS

    1. The authority citation for part 93 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120, 44101, 44111, 
44701, 44709, 44711, 44712, 44715, 44716, 44717, 44722, 46306, 
46315, 46316, 46502, 46504, 46506-46507, 47122, 47508, 47528-47531.

    2. Section 93.305 is amended by staying paragraphs (a) and (b) 
published on December 31, 1996 (61 FR 69330), and amended on April 4, 
2000 (65 FR 17736), until February 20, 2006.

    Issued in Washington, DC on February 20, 2003.
Marion Blakey,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 03-4495 Filed 2-24-03; 3:40 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P