[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 226 (Monday, November 24, 2003)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 65859-65863]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-29202]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 71
[Docket No. FAA-2003-15471; Airspace Docket No. 03-AWA-6]
RIN 2120-AA66
Proposed Modification of the Minneapolis Class B Airspace Area;
MN
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action proposes to modify the current Minneapolis, MN,
Class B airspace area. Specifically, this action proposes airspace
changes to contain large turbine-powered aircraft during operations to
the new Runway 17/35 and to address an increase in aircraft operations
to and from the Minneapolis-St. Paul International (Wold-Chamberlain)
Airport (MSP). The FAA is proposing this action to enhance safety and
improve the management of aircraft operations in the Minneapolis
terminal area. Further, this effort supports the FAA's national
airspace redesign goal of optimizing terminal and en route airspace
areas to reduce aircraft delays and improve system capacity.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 23, 2004.
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 20590-0001. You must identify both docket
numbers, FAA-2003-15471/Airspace Docket No. 03-AWA-6, at the beginning
of your comments.
You may also submit comments through the Internet at http://
http://dms.dot.gov">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 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays. The Dockets Office (telephone 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, 2300 East Devon Avenue, Des Plaines, IL 60018.
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 Nos. FAA-2003-15471/
Airspace Docket No. 03-AWA-6.'' 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 public 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 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's Web page at http://www.faa.gov
or the Superintendent of Documents Web page at http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara.
Additionally, any person may also obtain a copy of this notice by
submitting a request to the FAA, 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 August 1979, the FAA issued a final rule establishing the
Minneapolis, MN Terminal Control Area (TCA). This area was later re-
classified as a Class B airspace area as a result of the Airspace
Reclassification Final Rule (56 FR 65638); however, this final rule did
not alter the dimensions of the original TCA.
Since its establishment, the Minneapolis terminal area has
experienced a significant growth in aircraft operations from 233,000 in
1979 to over 518,000 in 2002. An analysis of MSP aircraft operations
indicates that this increase has resulted in aircraft (arriving and
departing MSP) frequently flying outside the horizontal and vertical
limits of the current MSP Class B airspace area.
Further, in the first half of 2002, there were 17 traffic alert and
collision avoidance system (TCAS) events reported in the area. These
TCAS events occurred in the airspace areas proposed in this notice as a
modification to the current MSP Class B airspace area. A TCAS event is
defined as a situation where a pilot receives an alert on an aircraft
in close proximity and is provided climb or descend instructions to
avoid that aircraft. The TCAS sounds an alarm when it determines that
[[Page 65860]]
another aircraft will pass too closely to the subject aircraft. The
referenced TCAS events were reported by air carrier aircraft and
reflected possible conflicts with non-ATC controlled visual flight
rules (VFR) aircraft.
Other action taken outside of this proposal in an effort to better
accommodate the increase in aircraft operations was the installation of
a precision runway monitor (PRM). The PRM allows for simultaneous ILS
approaches. In 1998, the PRM was installed to facilitate simultaneous
ILS approaches to closely spaced parallel runways (Runway 12L/30R and
30L/12R) using minimum separation between arriving aircraft. Although
this has increased airport capacity, during peak operations, high
performance aircraft must frequently intercept the localizers for ILS
approaches to the above runways more than 20 nautical miles (NM) from
MSP at 4,000 feet above mean sea level (MSL) and 5,000 feet MSL. This
results in aircraft initiating approach procedures outside of the
confines of the current MSP Class B airspace area. Also, a new runway,
scheduled to be opened in November 2004, is under construction. The new
runway (17/35) will provide increased airport capacity. However,
aircraft conducting instrument operations to this new runway would also
frequently need to intercept the instrument approaches outside the
Class B airspace area if the current Class B airspace area is not
expanded. The proposed Class B airspace modification will address this
matter.
Public Input
As announced in Letter to Airmen No. 00-02 and in the Federal
Register (65 FR 64642), informal airspace meetings were held on January
9, 2001, at the Army Aviation Support Facility, St. Paul, MN, and on
January 13, 2001, at the Flying Cloud Hennepin Technical College, Eden
Prairie, MN.
These meetings allowed interested airspace users an opportunity to
present their views and offer suggestions regarding planned
modifications to the MSP Class B airspace area. All comments received
during the informal airspace meetings and the subsequent comment
periods were considered in developing this proposal.
Analysis of Comments Received
Seven commenters ask questions or volunteered to participate in the
aeronautical study process.
Four commenters, three general aviation pilots and Northwest
Airlines, concurred with the proposal.
Three commenters, the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association
(AOPA), the Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA), and the Airline
Pilot's Association suggested raising the base altitude between 20 NM
and 30 NM from the Minneapolis-St. Paul International (Wold-
Chamberlain) Airport Distance Measuring Equipment (DME) Antenna (I-MSP)
and developing extensions at lower altitudes to the east and west of
MSP to accommodate aircraft conducting simultaneous operations to the
parallel runways. The FAA agrees with these comments and has changed
the planned modifications to reflect these suggestions.
Sixty-five commenters stated that the planned modifications would
require pilots to fly farther to conduct training and would compress
VFR aircraft operations into a smaller area. One of these commenters
also stated an opposition to raising the ceiling from 8,000 feet MSL to
10,000 feet MSL. The FAA has determined that some aircraft would have
to fly farther or at lower (or higher) altitudes to remain clear of the
planned MSP Class B airspace area; however, this is necessary to
separate them from large turbine-powered aircraft arriving and
departing MSP.
One hundred and sixty-four commenters (including 130 signed form
letters from glider pilots who operate out of Benson Municipal Airport
or Stanton Airfield) opposed the planned base altitude of 4,000 feet
over Benson Municipal Airport and Stanton Airfield. The Benson
Municipal Airport (located 17 miles to the north of I-MSP) is within
the lateral limits of the current MSP Class B airspace area and the
planned expansion of the 4,000-foot base altitude to 30 NM from I-MSP
would require aircraft departing the Benson Municipal Airport to fly 13
miles farther to depart the lateral limits of the MSP Class B airspace
area and may also interfere with glider operations at that airport.
Glider operations may also be impacted at Stanton Airfield, which is
located approximately 30 NM to the south of MSP on the edge of the
planned MSP Class B airspace area. To address these concerns, the FAA
has changed the planned modifications by raising the base altitude
between 20 NM and 30 NM from I-MSP from 4,000 feet MSL to 7,000 feet
MSL (with the exception of extensions to the east and west of MSP that
must remain at 4,000 feet MSL to contain aircraft conducting
simultaneous approaches. The planned modifications were also changed to
include ``cut-outs'' 20 NM to the north and 25 NM to the south of I-
MSP. These changes mitigate the impact on glider operations at the
Benson Municipal Airport and Stanton Airfield, respectively.
Ad Hoc Committee
The Ad Hoc Committee was sponsored by Minnesota Department of
Transportation, Office of Aeronautics and was comprised of
representatives from the AOPA, EAA, Minnesota Soaring Clubs,
International Aerobatics, Ultralight Association, Air National Guard,
Life Flight, flight instructors, and skydivers. On May 14, 2002, the Ad
Hoc Committee held the first of two meetings. During this meeting,
representatives from the Minneapolis Airport Traffic Control Tower
presented details of planned MSP Class B airspace area modifications,
which reflected comments received as a result of informal airspace
meetings. In general, the Ad Hoc Committee's comments on the planned
modifications were favorable. However, several invited members of the
Ad Hoc Committee were not present and the committee decided that an
additional meeting was necessary to ensure that input was obtained from
all members/organizations who had agreed to participate on the Ad Hoc
Committee.
On June 25, 2002, the Ad Hoc Committee held their second and final
meeting. During this meeting, participants presented comments and
recommendations regarding the planned modifications presented at the
first Ad Hoc Committee meeting. The Ad Hoc Committee then reached a
consensus and drafted a consolidated recommendation that was submitted
to the FAA. The consolidated recommendation contained the following two
suggestions and one comment pertaining to aerobatic waivers:
1. Reduce the proposed expansion of Area E around the Stanton
Airfield from the I-MSP 30-NM arc to the I-MSP 25-NM arc and raise the
proposed floor in this area from 6,000 feet MSL to 7,000 feet MSL. The
FAA has adopted this recommendation.
2. Provide a cutout in Area D over Benson Municipal Airport,
bounded by the Farmington (FGT) Very High Frequency Omnidirectional
Range/Tactical Air Navigation (VORTAC) 006[deg] radial, the FGT VORTAC
015[deg] radial, and the Gopher (GEP) VORTAC 095[deg] radial. The FAA
did not adopt this recommendation because the area is within the
existing Class B airspace area and the published missed approach
holding pattern used for the majority of MSP instrument approach
procedures utilizes the Whisk intersection, which is located within the
area that the recommendation suggests eliminating.
[[Page 65861]]
Altitudes utilized by aircraft holding at the Whisk intersection are
3,000 feet MSL to 10,000 feet MSL.
Members of the Ad Hoc User Committee representing the aerobatic
community also requested that currently held waivers for aerobatic
activities remain in place. The FAA has determined that the planned
Class B airspace area modifications would not require the cancellation
of any existing waivers, nor would it interfere with the normal
procedures required for authorizing future waivers.
The Proposal
The FAA is proposing an amendment to part 71 of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 71) to modify the MSP Class B
airspace area. Specifically, this action (depicted on the attached
chart) proposes to expand the upper limits of Area A, Area B, Area C,
and Area D from 8,000 feet MSL to and including 10,000 feet MSL; expand
the lateral limits of Area D to the northwest and southeast of MSP; and
add an Area E within 30 NM of I-MSP (excluding areas to the north and
south of MSP) to improve the containment of turbo-jet aircraft
operating within the MSP Class B airspace area.
Area A. The FAA proposes to expand the upper limit of Area A from
8,000 feet MSL to 10,000 feet MSL. The reason for this change is to
provide additional airspace needed to ensure that aircraft departing
and arriving MSP are contained within the MSP Class B airspace area.
Area B. The FAA proposes to expand the upper limit of Area B from
8,000 feet MSL to 10,000 feet MSL. The reason for this change is to
provide additional airspace needed to ensure that aircraft departing
and arriving MSP are contained within the MSP Class B airspace area.
Area C. The FAA proposes to expand the upper limit of Area C from
8,000 feet MSL to 10,000 feet MSL. The reason for this change is to
provide additional airspace needed to ensure that aircraft departing
and arriving MSP are contained within the MSP Class B airspace area.
Area D. The FAA proposes to modify Area D by expanding the upper
limit of Area D from 8,000 feet MSL to 10,000 feet MSL and by expanding
the boundaries of Area D to the northwest and southeast of MSP
incorporating airspace that lies on the extended ILS localizer course
and downwind legs for Runways 12L/30R and 30L/12R, between the I-MSP
20-NM and 30-NM arcs. The reason for this change is to provide
additional airspace needed to ensure that aircraft vectored for the ILS
approaches to the above runways remain within the MSP Class B airspace
area.
Area E. The FAA is proposing to add an Area E between the I-MSP 20-
NM and 30-NM arcs, extending from 7,000 feet MSL to 10,000 feet MSL,
excluding certain areas to the north and southeast of MSP. The reason
for this change is to provide additional airspace needed to ensure that
aircraft departing and arriving MSP are contained within the MSP Class
B airspace area.
These modifications would improve the management of aircraft
operations in the MSP terminal area and enhance safety by expanding the
dimensions of the Class B airspace area to protect the aircraft
conducting instrument approaches to MSP. Additionally, this proposed
action supports various efforts to enhance the efficiency and capacity
of the National Airspace System.
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 7400.9L, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,
dated September 2, 2003, and effective September 16, 2003, 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.
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 intended regulation justify its costs. Second,
the Regulatory Flexibility Act requires agencies to analyze the
economic effect of regulatory changes on small businesses and other
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: (1) Would generate benefits that justify its
circumnavigation costs and is not a ``significant regulatory action''
as defined in the Executive Order; (2) is not significant as defined in
the 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. These analyses are summarized here in the
preamble, and the full Regulatory Evaluation is in the docket.
This NPRM would modify the Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN, Class B
airspace area. The proposed rule would reconfigure the sub-area lateral
boundaries, and raise the altitude ceiling in certain segments of the
airspace.
The NPRM would generate benefits for system users and the FAA in
the form of enhanced operational efficiency and simplified navigation
in the MSP terminal area. These modifications would impose some
circumnavigation costs on operators of non-compliant aircraft operating
in the area around MSP. However, the cost of circumnavigation is
considered to be small. Thus, the FAA has determined this proposed rule
would be cost-beneficial.
Initial 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 rationale for
their actions. The Act covers a widerange 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.
This proposed rule may impose some circumnavigation costs on
individuals operating in the Minneapolis-St. Paul terminal area; but
the proposed rule would not impose any costs on small business
entities. Operators of general aviation aircraft are considered
individuals, not small business entities
[[Page 65862]]
and are not included when performing a regulatory flexibility analysis.
Flight schools are considered small business entities. However, the FAA
assumes that they provide instruction in aircraft equipped to navigate
in Class B airspace given they currently provide instruction in the
Minneapolis-St. Paul terminal area. Air taxis are also considered small
business entities, but are assumed to be properly equipped to navigate
Class B airspace because it is part of their current practice.
Therefore, these small entities should not incur any additional costs
as a result of the proposed rule. Accordingly, pursuant to the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), the Federal Aviation
Administration certifies this rule would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The FAA
solicits comments from affected entities with respect to this finding
and determination.
International Trade Impact Assessment
The Trade Agreement Act 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 statute also requires consideration of international
standards and where appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S.
standards.
The proposed rule is not expected to affect trade opportunities for
U.S. firms doing business overseas or for foreign firms doing business
in the United States.
Unfunded Mandates Assessment
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 ``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.
Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-
511), there are no requirements for information collection associated
with this proposed rule.
Conclusion
In view of the minimal or zero cost of compliance of the proposed
rule and the enhancements to operational efficiency that do not reduce
aviation safety, the FAA has determined that the proposed rule would be
cost-beneficial.
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]
1. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9L, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated September 2, 2003, and effective September 16,
2003, is amended as follows:
Paragraph 3000 Subpart B-Class B Airspace
* * * * *
AGL MN B Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN (Revised)
Minneapolis-St. Paul International (Wold-Chamberlain) Airport
(MSP)(Primary Airport)
(Lat. 44[deg]52'83'' N., long. 93[deg]13'02'' W.)
Gopher VORTAC (GEP)
(Lat. 45[deg]08'45'' N., long. 93[deg]22'24'' W.)
Flying Cloud VOR/DME (FCM)
(Lat. 44[deg]49'33'' N., long. 93[deg]27'24'' W.)
Point of Origin: Minneapolis-St. Paul International (Wold-
Chamberlain) Airport DME Antenna (I-MSP)
(Lat. 44[deg]52'26.25'' N., long. 93[deg]12'19.5'' W.)
Boundaries
Area A. That airspace extending upward from the surface to and
including 10,000 feet MSL within a 6-mile radius of I-MSP.
Area B. That airspace extending from 2,300 feet MSL to and
including 10,000 feet MSL within an 8.5-mile radius of I-MSP,
excluding Area A previously described.
Area C. That airspace extending from 3,000 feet MSL to and
including 10,000 feet MSL within a 12-mile radius of I-MSP,
excluding Area A and Area B previously described.
Area D. That airspace extending from 4,000 feet MSL to and
including 10,000 feet MSL within a 20-mile radius of I-MSP and
including that airspace within a 30-mile radius from the Flying
Cloud 295[deg] radial clockwise to the Gopher 295[deg] radial and
from the Gopher 115[deg] radial clockwise to the Flying Cloud
115[deg] radial, excluding Area A, Area B, and Area C previously
described.
Area E. That airspace extending from 7,000 feet MSL to and
including 10,000 feet MSL within a 30-mile radius of I-MSP from the
Gopher 295[deg] radial clockwise to the Gopher 352[deg] radial, and
from the Gopher 085[deg] radial clockwise to the Gopher 115[deg]
radial, and from the Flying Cloud 115[deg] radial clockwise to the
Flying Cloud 295[deg] radial excluding that airspace between a 25-
mile radius and a 30-mile radius between the Flying Cloud 115[deg]
radial clockwise to the Gopher 170[deg] radial and excluding Area A,
Area B, Area C, and Area D previously described.
* * * * *
Issued in Washington, DC, on November 17, 2003.
Reginald C. Matthews,
Manager, Airspace and Rules Division.
[[Page 65863]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24NO03.000
[FR Doc. 03-29202 Filed 11-21-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-C