[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 40 (Friday, February 28, 2003)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 9792-9795]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-4638]



[[Page 9791]]

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

Part III





Department of Transportation





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



Federal Aviation Administration



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



14 CFR Parts 91 and 93



Special Air Traffic Rules; Flight Restrictions in the Vicinity of 
Niagara Falls; Final Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 40 / Friday, February 28, 2003 / 
Rules and Regulations  

[[Page 9792]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Parts 91 and 93

[Docket No.: FAA-2002-13235; Amendment Nos. 91-273 and 93-82]
RIN 2120-AH57


Special Air Traffic Rules; Flight Restrictions in the Vicinity of 
Niagara Falls

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action codifies current flight restrictions for aircraft 
operating in U.S. airspace in the vicinity of Niagara Falls, NY. The 
FAA is taking this action to complement flight management procedures 
established for Niagara Falls by the Canadian government. The intended 
effect of this action is to prevent unsafe congestion of aircraft in 
this popular sightseeing area. The FAA is also adopting a number of 
editorial changes to parts 91 and 93 of Title 14, Code of Federal 
Regulations.

DATES: Effective on March 20, 2003.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Terry Brown or Jan Glivings, 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: 

Availability of Rulemaking Documents

    You can get an electronic copy of this document using the Internet 
by:
    (1) Using the docket number of this rulemaking to search the 
Department of Transportation's electronic Docket Management System 
(DMS) Web page (http://dms.dot.gov/search);
    (2)Visiting the Office of Rulemaking's Web page at http://www.faa.gov/avr/arm/index.cfm; or
    (3) Accessing the Government Printing Office's Web page at http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/aces140.html.
    You can also get a copy by submitting a request to the Federal 
Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence 
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling (202) 267-9680. Make 
sure to identify the amendment number or docket number of this 
rulemaking.

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 its local FAA official, or the person listed 
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. You can find out more about 
SBREFA on the Internet at http://www.faa.gov/avr/arm/sbrefa.htm, or by 
e-mailing us at [email protected].

Background

    On September 4, 2002, the FAA published in the Federal Register a 
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to codify current flight 
restrictions for aircraft operating in U.S. airspace in the vicinity of 
Niagara Falls and to make editorial changes to parts 91 and 93 of Title 
14, CFR (67 FR 56740). See the preamble to the NPRM for a discussion of 
the following:
    [sbull] Canadian flight restrictions in the area,
    [sbull] Complimentary U.S. temporary flight restriction,
    [sbull] The public meeting we sponsored in 1993, and
    [sbull] The specifics of the proposed rule.
    The background material in the NPRM also contains the basis and 
rationale for this final rule and, except where we have specifically 
expanded on the background elsewhere in this preamble, provides the 
justification for this final rule.
    The comment period for the NPRM was open for 45 days and closed on 
October 21, 2002. In response to the NPRM, we received a letter 
containing comments from the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association 
(AOPA), which is discussed below.

Discussion of Comments

    In a letter dated October 18, 2002, the AOPA concurs with codifying 
the current U.S. temporary flight restriction in the vicinity of 
Niagara Falls to prevent congestion and reduce the risk of collision by 
sightseeing aircraft. However, the AOPA is opposed to parts of the NPRM 
that go beyond a simple codification of the existing temporary flight 
restriction. The commenter believes that certain items in the proposed 
regulations are advisory in nature and should not be made mandatory. 
The commenter identified the following parts of proposed Sec.  93.71 as 
those that should remain recommendations:
    [sbull] Paragraph (e)(1)--Fly a clockwise pattern,
    [sbull] Paragraph (e)(2)--Do not proceed north of the Rainbow 
Bridge,
    [sbull] Paragraph (e)(3)--Prior to joining the pattern, broadcast 
flight intentions on frequency 122.05 Mhz, giving altitude and 
position, and monitor the frequency while in the pattern,
    [sbull] Paragraph (e)(6)--Anticipate heavy congestion of VFR 
traffic at or above 3,500 feet MSL,
    [sbull] Paragraph (e)(7)--Use caution to avoid high-speed civil and 
military aircraft transiting the area to or from Niagara Falls Airport,
    [sbull] Paragraph (f)--These procedures do not relieve pilots from 
the requirements of Sec.  91.113 of this chapter to see and avoid other 
aircraft, and
    [sbull] Paragraph (g)--Flight following, to and from the area, is 
available through Buffalo Approach.
    The commenter asserts that including these proposed provisions in 
the final rule is unnecessary and inappropriate and mandating them 
would likely create compliance and enforcement problems. Further, there 
is no evidence that safety problems have occurred as a result of the 
procedures being recommended rather than mandated.
    The FAA does not agree with the commenter that the provisions in 
Sec.  93.71(e)-(f) should be advisory. These provisions establish the 
rules of the road for the airspace above Niagara Falls. While these 
provisions have been advisory under the temporary flight restriction, 
this rulemaking is designed to make these advisory procedures mandatory 
to ensure consistency with Canadian regulations and to safely manage 
the airspace. In addition, these provisions provide requirements that 
will not be available once the temporary flight restriction is 
withdrawn. If we were to allow these procedures to remain advisory, the 
possibility would exist that someone could operate contrary to all of 
these procedures without any repercussion, while the majority of pilots 
in the area would be operating in accordance with them. Such a 
situation could cause a significant safety problem in this airspace.
    We also do not agree with the commenter's characterization of 
proposed Sec.  93.71(g) as a requirement. We intend this paragraph to 
simply provide information. For this reason, we are not making any 
changes to it in this final rule.

Section-by-Section Analysis of the Final Rule

Subpart E--Flight Restrictions in the Vicinity of Niagara Falls, NY

Sec.  93.71 General operating procedures

    The FAA is adopting a new subpart E to 14 CFR part 93 (consisting 
of Sec.  93.71)

[[Page 9793]]

that codifies the current temporary flight restrictions in the vicinity 
of Niagara Falls. This final rule complements and supports flight 
management procedures established by Transport Canada for Canadian 
airspace in the vicinity of Niagara Falls to prevent unsafe congestion 
of sightseeing and other aircraft. Final Sec.  93.71(a) establishes 
flight restrictions below 3,500 feet MSL in the airspace above Niagara 
Falls, New York, west of a line from latitude 43[deg]06'33'' N., 
longitude 79[deg]03'30'' W. (the Whirlpool Rapids Bridge) to latitude 
43[deg]04'47'' N., longitude 79[deg]02'44'' W. (the Niagara River 
Inlet) to latitude 43[deg]04'29'' N., longitude 79[deg]03'30'' W. (the 
International Control Dam) to the United States/Canadian Border and 
thence along the border to the point of origin.
    Final Sec.  93.71(b) prohibits flight in the area described in 
final paragraph (a) except for aircraft operations conducted directly 
to or from an airport/heliport within the area, aircraft operating on 
an ATC-approved IFR flight plan, aircraft operating the Scenic Falls 
Route pursuant to approval of Transport Canada, aircraft carrying law 
enforcement officials, or aircraft carrying properly accredited news 
representatives for which a flight plan has been filed with Buffalo NY 
(BUF) Automated Flight Service Station (AFSS).
    Final Sec.  93.71(c) requires pilots to check with Transport Canada 
for flight restrictions in Canadian airspace. It also advises pilots 
that commercial air tour operations approved by Transport Canada are 
conducting a north/south orbit of the Niagara Falls area below 3,500 
feet MSL over the Niagara River.
    Final Sec.  93.71(d) establishes the minimum altitude for VFR 
flight over the Scenic Falls area as 3,500 feet MSL.
    Final Sec.  93.71(e) requires pilots to comply with the following 
procedures when conducting flight over the area described in final 
Sec.  93.71(a):
    (1) Fly a clockwise pattern;
    (2) Do not proceed north of the Rainbow Bridge;
    (3) Prior to joining the pattern, broadcast flight intentions on 
frequency 122.05 Mhz, giving altitude and position, and monitor the 
frequency while in the pattern;
    (4) Use the Niagara Falls airport altimeter setting. Contact 
Niagara Falls Airport Traffic Control Tower to obtain the current 
altimeter setting, to facilitate the exchange of traffic advisories/
restrictions, and to reduce the risk of midair collisions between 
aircraft operating in the vicinity of the Falls. If the Control Tower 
is closed, use the appropriate Automatic Terminal Information Service 
(ATIS) Frequency;
    (5) Do not exceed 130 knots;
    (6) Anticipate heavy congestion of VFR traffic at or above 3,500 
feet MSL; and
    (7) Use caution to avoid high-speed civil and military aircraft 
transiting the area to or from Niagara Falls Airport.
    Final Sec.  93.71(f) tells pilots these procedures do not relieve 
them from the requirements of Sec.  91.113 of this chapter to see and 
avoid other aircraft.
    Final Sec.  93.71(g) advises pilots that flight following, to and 
from the area, is available through Buffalo Approach.

Editorial Changes to Parts 91 and 93

    The FAA is also adopting a number of editorial changes to 14 CFR 
parts 91 and 93. These changes include the following:
    [sbull] Change the title of part 93 from ``Special Air Traffic 
Rules and Airport Traffic Patterns'' to ``Special Air Traffic Rules.'' 
This title better describes the intent of part 93 and the activities it 
addresses.
    [sbull] Change Sec.  93.1 to reflect the deletion of the term 
``airport traffic area'' and for the purposes of brevity and clarity. 
On December 17, 1991, the FAA published a final rule (56 FR 65638) that 
reclassified various airspace designations and deleted the term 
``airport traffic area.'' We intended these changes to apply to all 
similarly designated airspace areas. However, we have not adopted 
corresponding changes to part 93 until now.
    [sbull] Change Sec.  93.51 by deleting the phrase ``and traffic 
patterns'' to be consistent with the change to the title of part 93 
described above.
    [sbull] Divide Sec.  93.81, which contains the special air traffic 
rule for the Valparaiso, Florida, Terminal Area, into two sections, 
93.80 and 93.81, with minor editorial changes to new Sec.  93.80, 
Applicability.
    [sbull] Make a minor editorial change to Sec.  93.117, which 
describes the applicability of the special air traffic rule for the 
Lorain County (Ohio) Regional Airport.
    [sbull] Divide existing Sec.  93.151, which describes the 
applicability of the special air traffic rule for the Ketchikan 
(Alaska) International Airport, into two sections, 93.151 and 93.152, 
with minor editorial changes to Sec.  93.151.
    [sbull] Change the alphabetical listing in section 4 of Appendix D 
to part 91, change the title of subpart T, and change Sec. Sec.  93.251 
and 93.253 to reflect the renaming of Ronald Reagan Washington National 
Airport.
    We do not intend these editorial changes to change the substance of 
parts 91 or 93.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    There are no current or new requirements for information collection 
associated with this amendment.

International Compatibility

    In keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on 
International Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to comply with 
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards and 
Recommended Practices to the maximum extent practicable. The FAA has 
determined that there are no ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices 
that correspond to these regulations.

Economic Assessment, Regulatory Flexibility Determination, Trade Impact 
Assessment, and Unfunded Mandates Assessment

    Proposed changes to Federal regulations must undergo several 
economic analyses. First, Executive Order 12866 directs each Federal 
agency to 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 impact of regulatory changes on small entities. 
Third, the Trade Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 2531-2533) prohibits 
agencies from setting standards that create unnecessary obstacles to 
the foreign commerce of the United States. In developing U.S. 
standards, this Trade Act also requires agencies to consider 
international standards and, where appropriate, use them as the basis 
of U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
(Pub. L. 104-4) requires agencies to prepare a written assessment of 
the costs, benefits, and other effects of proposed or final rules that 
include a Federal mandate likely to result in the expenditure by State, 
local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private 
sector, of $100 million or more annually (adjusted for inflation).
    In conducting these analyses, FAA has determined this rule (1) Has 
benefits that justify its costs, is not a ``significant regulatory 
action'' as defined in section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 and is not 
``significant'' as defined in DOT's Regulatory Policies and Procedures; 
(2) will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number 
of small entities; (3) will reduce barriers to international trade; and 
(4) does not impose an unfunded mandate on state, local, or tribal 
governments, or on the

[[Page 9794]]

private sector. These analyses, available in the docket, are summarized 
below.

Economic Assessment

    This final rule codifies the current temporary flight restriction 
for those aircraft operating in U.S. airspace in the vicinity of 
Niagara Falls, NY. The FAA is taking this action to complement flight 
management procedures established for the Falls by Transport Canada. 
Additionally, this action makes a number of editorial changes to 14 CFR 
parts 91 and 93.
    As a rule, the FAA does a benefit-cost analysis when this agency 
makes a temporary flight restriction permanent by rulemaking. However, 
this temporary flight restriction has been in effect for almost eight 
years. This length of time makes it difficult to obtain data to 
estimate baseline costs before the imposition of the temporary flight 
restriction. The FAA does not believe that the temporary flight 
restriction imposed significant costs on aircraft operating in U.S. 
airspace in the vicinity of Niagara Falls, NY, and the FAA does not 
believe this rulemaking will impose significant costs on those 
operators. We received no comments in response to the NPRM concerning 
the costs imposed by this rulemaking.
    Regarding benefits, the FAA is aware of the mid-air collision in 
the vicinity of Niagara Falls before the issuance of the temporary 
flight restriction and before the flight management procedures 
established by Transport Canada. Since the issuance of the temporary 
flight restriction and Canadian flight management procedures, there 
have been no mid-air collisions. The FAA believes that the flight 
management procedures established in the temporary flight restriction 
and by Transport Canada are responsible for this improvement in 
aviation safety. The FAA is making the temporary flight restriction 
permanent because we believe that there are positive aviation safety 
benefits from imposing these flight restrictions on aircraft operating 
in U.S. airspace in the vicinity of Niagara Falls. We did not receive 
any public comments regarding these benefit findings in response to the 
NPRM.
    The FAA finds that the safety benefits accruing to this rulemaking 
justify the costs imposed. Therefore, the FAA finds this final rule to 
be cost-beneficial.

Regulatory Flexibility Determination

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) 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 principle, the Act requires agencies to 
solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain the 
rationale 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 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 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.
    The FAA believes that this action imposes little costs on any small 
entities subject to this rule. Any costs of complying with the final 
rule are already borne by those complying with the existing flight 
restrictions for the past eight years. Consequently, the FAA certifies 
that the final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. We did not receive any public 
comments regarding this cost finding.

Trade Impact Assessment

    The Trade Agreement Act of 1979 prohibits Federal agencies from 
establishing any standards or engaging in 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 statute also requires 
consideration of international standards and, where appropriate, that 
they be the basis for U.S. standards. The FAA has assessed the 
potential effect of this rulemaking to be minimal and has determined 
that it will not result in an impact on international trade by 
companies doing business in or with the United States.

Unfunded Mandates Assessment

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (the Act) is intended, 
among other things, to curb the practice of imposing unfunded Federal 
mandates on State, local, and tribal governments. Title II of the Act 
requires each Federal agency to prepare a written statement assessing 
the effects of any Federal mandate in a proposed or final agency rule 
that may result in an 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; such a mandate 
is deemed to be a ``significant regulatory action.''
    This final rule does not contain such a mandate. The requirements 
of Title II of the Act, therefore, do not apply.

Executive Order 3132, Federalism

    The FAA has analyzed this final rule under the principles and 
criteria of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. We determined that this 
action will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, or the 
relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government, and therefore does not have federalism implications.

Environmental Analysis

    FAA Order 1050.1D defines FAA actions that may be categorically 
excluded from preparation of a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 
environmental impact statement. In accordance with FAA Order 1050.1D, 
appendix 4, paragraph 4(j), this rulemaking action qualifies for a 
categorical exclusion.

Energy Impact

    The energy impact of the notice has been assessed in accordance 
with the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) Public Law 94-163, 
as amended (42 U.S.C. 6362) and FAA Order 1053.1. We have determined 
that the final rule is not a major regulatory action under the 
provisions of the EPCA.

List of Subjects

14 CFR Part 91

    Afghanistan, Agriculture, Air traffic control, Aircraft, Airmen, 
Airports, Aviation safety, Canada, Cuba, Ethiopia, Freight, Mexico, 
Noise control, Political candidates, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Yugoslavia.

14 CFR Part 93

    Aircraft flight, Airspace, Aviation safety, Air traffic control.

The Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation 
Administration amends Chapter I of Title 14, Code of Federal 
Regulations as follows:

[[Page 9795]]

PART 91--GENERAL OPERATING AND FLIGHT RULES

    1. The authority citation for part 91 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 1155, 40103, 40113, 40120, 44101, 
44111, 44701, 44709, 44711, 44712, 44715, 44716, 44717, 44722, 
46306, 46315, 46316, 46504, 46506-46507, 47122, 47508, 47528-47531, 
articles 12 and 29 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation 
(61 stat. 1180).


    2. Amend section 4 of Appendix D to part 91 by removing the words 
``Washington National Airport'' and adding in their place the words 
``Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport'' in the alphabetical list 
of cities and airports.

PART 93--SPECIAL AIR TRAFFIC RULES

    3. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 93 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40109, 40113, 44502, 
44514, 44701, 44719, 46301.


    4. Amend part 93 by revising the title to read as set forth above.


    5. Revise Sec.  93.1 to read as follows:


Sec.  93.1  Applicability.

    This part prescribes special air traffic rules for operating 
aircraft in certain areas described in this part, unless otherwise 
authorized by air traffic control.

    6. Revise Sec.  93.51 to read as follows:


Sec.  93.51  Applicability.

    This subpart prescribes special air traffic rules for aircraft 
operating in the Anchorage, Alaska, Terminal Area.

    7. Amend part 93 by adding Subpart E consisting of Sec.  93.71 to 
read as follows:

Subpart E--Flight Restrictions in the Vicinity of Niagara Falls, 
New York


Sec.  93.71  General operating procedures.

    (a) Flight restrictions are in effect below 3,500 feet MSL in the 
airspace above Niagara Falls, New York, west of a line from latitude 
43[deg]06'33'' N., longitude 79[deg]03'30'' W. (the Whirlpool Rapids 
Bridge) to latitude 43[deg]04'47'' N., longitude 79[deg]02'44'' W. (the 
Niagara River Inlet) to latitude 43[deg]04'29'' N., longitude 
79[deg]03'30'' W. (the International Control Dam) to the United States/
Canadian Border and thence along the border to the point of origin.
    (b) No flight is authorized below 3,500 feet MSL in the area 
described in paragraph (a) of this section, except for aircraft 
operations conducted directly to or from an airport/heliport within the 
area, aircraft operating on an ATC-approved IFR flight plan, aircraft 
operating the Scenic Falls Route pursuant to approval of Transport 
Canada, aircraft carrying law enforcement officials, or aircraft 
carrying properly accredited news representatives for which a flight 
plan has been filed with Buffalo NY (BUF) Automated Flight Service 
Station (AFSS).
    (c) Check with Transport Canada for flight restrictions in Canadian 
airspace. Commercial air tour operations approved by Transport Canada 
will be conducting a north/south orbit of the Niagara Falls area below 
3,500 feet MSL over the Niagara River.
    (d) The minimum altitude for VFR flight over the Scenic Falls area 
is 3,500 feet MSL.
    (e) Comply with the following procedures when conducting flight 
over the area described in paragraph (a) of this section:
    (1) Fly a clockwise pattern;
    (2) Do not proceed north of the Rainbow Bridge;
    (3) Prior to joining the pattern, broadcast flight intentions on 
frequency 122.05 Mhz, giving altitude and position, and monitor the 
frequency while in the pattern;
    (4) Use the Niagara Falls airport altimeter setting. Contact 
Niagara Falls Airport Traffic Control Tower to obtain the current 
altimeter setting, to facilitate the exchange of traffic advisories/
restrictions, and to reduce the risk of midair collisions between 
aircraft operating in the vicinity of the Falls. If the Control Tower 
is closed, use the appropriate Automatic Terminal Information Service 
(ATIS) Frequency;
    (5) Do not exceed 130 knots;
    (6) Anticipate heavy congestion of VFR traffic at or above 3,500 
feet MSL; and
    (7) Use caution to avoid high-speed civil and military aircraft 
transiting the area to or from Niagara Falls Airport.
    (f) These procedures do not relieve pilots from the requirements of 
Sec.  91.113 of this chapter to see and avoid other aircraft.
    (g) Flight following, to and from the area, is available through 
Buffalo Approach.

    8. Add new Sec.  93.80 to read as follows:


Sec.  93.80  Applicability.

    This subpart prescribes special air traffic rules for aircraft 
operating in the Valparaiso, Florida, Terminal Area.


Sec.  93.81  [Amended]

    9. Amend Sec.  93.81 by removing paragraph (a); removing the 
paragraph designation of paragraph (b); and redesignating paragraphs 
(b)(1), (2), (2)(i), (2)(ii), and (2)(iii) as (a), (b), (b)(1), (b)(2), 
and (b)(3) respectively.

    10. Revise Sec.  93.117 to read as follows:


Sec.  93.117  Applicability.

    This subpart prescribes a special air traffic rule for aircraft 
operating at the Lorain County Regional Airport, Lorain County, Ohio.

    11. Revise Sec.  93.151 to read as follows:


Sec.  93.151  Applicability.

    This subpart prescribes a special air traffic rule for aircraft 
conducting VFR operations in the vicinity of the Ketchikan 
International Airport or Ketchikan Harbor, Alaska.

    12. Add new Sec.  93.152 to read as follows:


Sec.  93.152  Description of area.

    Within that airspace below 3,000 feet MSL within the lateral 
boundary of the surface area of the Ketchikan Class E airspace 
regardless of whether that airspace is in effect.

Subpart T to Part 93 [Amended]

    13. In the heading and text of subpart T, remove the words 
``Washington National Airport'' and add, in their place, the words 
``Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport''.

    Issued in Washington, DC on February 19, 2003.
Marion C. Blakey,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 03-4638 Filed 2-27-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P