[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 244 (Thursday, December 19, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 76779-76781]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-30086]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 71
[Docket No. FAA-2013-0922; Airspace Docket No. 13-AWA-5]
RIN 2120-AA66
Proposed Modification of the Philadelphia, PA, Class B Airspace
Area
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend the description of Area G of the
Philadelphia Class B airspace area to correct a design error that
resulted in the Class B airspace being published 2.1 nautical miles
(NM) larger on the southeast side of the area than intended. No other
changes to the Philadelphia Class B airspace are being proposed.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before February 3, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001;
telephone: (202) 366-9826. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA-2013-
0922 and Airspace Docket No. 13-AWA-5 at the beginning of your
comments. You may also submit comments through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Gallant, Airspace Policy and
Regulations Group, Office of Airspace Services, 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 (FAA Docket No.
FAA-2013-0922 and Airspace Docket No. 13-AWA-5) and be submitted in
triplicate to the Docket Management Facility (see ADDRESSES section for
address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the
internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to Docket Nos. FAA-2013-0922 and Airspace Docket No. 13-AWA-5.'' 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 action may
[[Page 76780]]
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 NPRMs
An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between
9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal
business hours at the office of the Eastern Service Center, Federal
Aviation Administration, Room 210, 1701 Columbia Ave., College Park, GA
30337.
Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
NPRMs should contact 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
On May 9, 2013, the FAA published a final rule modifying the
Philadelphia Class B airspace area (78 FR 27025, July 25, 2013). After
publication, it was found that Area G extended 2.1 NM farther southeast
than intended from the Philadelphia International Airport. This was
caused by the miscalculation of two points during the design of the
Area G boundaries.
The Proposal
The FAA is proposing to amend Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations
(14 CFR) part 71 to correct two points used to define the boundaries of
Area G in the description of the Philadelphia Class B airspace area.
Specifically, the point that reads ``. . . the intersection of the PHL
20-mile radius and the 136[deg] bearing from PHL . . .'' would be
changed to read ``. . . the intersection of the 17.9-mile radius and
the 138[deg] bearing from PHL. . . .'' This point appears in two places
in the Area G description. In addition, the point that reads ``. . .
the intersection of the PHL 20-mile radius and the 120[deg] bearing
from PHL . . .'' would be changed to read ``. . . the intersection of
the 20-mile radius and the 118[deg] bearing from PHL. . . .'' This
point appears once in the Area G description. This change would result
in a small reduction in the lateral dimensions of Class B airspace
southeast of Philadelphia International Airport, near the Cross Keys
Airport, NJ (17N).
The FAA is not proposing modifications to any other parts of the
Philadelphia Class B airspace area.
All radials listed in this proposal stated in degrees relative to
True North. All geographic coordinates are stated in degrees, minutes,
and seconds based on North American Datum 83.
Class B airspace areas are published in paragraph 3000 of FAA Order
7400.9X, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 7,
2013, and effective September 15, 2013, 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 and Executive Order 13563 direct
that each Federal agency shall propose or adopt a regulation only upon
a reasoned determination that the benefits of the intended regulation
justify its costs. Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub.
L. 96-354) requires agencies to analyze the economic impact of
regulatory changes on small entities. Third, the Trade Agreements Act
(Pub. L. 96-39) prohibits agencies from setting standards that create
unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. In
developing U.S. standards, the Trade Act requires agencies to consider
international standards and, where appropriate, that they be 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 with
base year of 1995). This portion of the preamble summarizes the FAA's
analysis of the economic impacts of this proposed rule.
Department of Transportation Order DOT 2100.5 prescribes policies
and procedures for simplification, analysis, and review of regulations.
If the expected cost impact is so minimal that a proposed or final rule
does not warrant a full evaluation, this order permits that a statement
to that effect and the basis for it to be included in the preamble if a
full regulatory evaluation of the cost and benefits is not prepared.
Such a determination has been made for this proposed rule. The
reasoning for this determination follows:
This proposal would amend the description of Area G of the
Philadelphia Class B area to correct a design error that resulted in
the Class B airspace being published 2.1 NM larger than intended on the
southeast side of the area.
This proposed rule has the following benefits.
1. It would improve the flow of air traffic, enhance safety, and
reduce the potential for midair collision in the Philadelphia Class B
airspace.
2. It would continue to ensure the containment of large turbine-
powered aircraft within Class B airspace as required by FAA directive.
3. It would provide VFR aircraft with additional non-Class B
airspace.
4. It would enhance the safety and efficient management of aircraft
operations in the Philadelphia terminal area.
The FAA believes that this proposed rule would result in minimal
costs.
The FAA has, therefore, determined that this proposed rule 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.
Regulatory Flexibility Determination
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) (RFA)
establishes ``as a principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall
endeavor, consistent with the objectives of the rule and of applicable
statutes, to fit regulatory and informational requirements to the scale
of the businesses, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions
subject to regulation.'' To achieve this principle, agencies are
required to solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to
explain the rationale for their actions to assure that such proposals
are given serious consideration.'' 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 rule will
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. If the agency determines that it will, the agency must
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis as described in the RFA.
However, if an agency determines that a rule is not expected to
have a significant economic impact on a
[[Page 76781]]
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 the proposed rule would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, as the
economic impact is expected to be minimal. If an agency determines that
a rulemaking will not result in a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities, the head of the agency may so
certify under section 605(b) of the RFA. Therefore, as provided in
section 605(b), the head of the FAA certifies that this rulemaking will
not result in a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
International Trade Impact Assessment
The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39), as amended by the
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. L. 103-465), prohibits Federal
agencies from establishing standards or engaging in related activities
that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United
States. Pursuant to these Acts, the establishment of standards is not
considered an unnecessary obstacle to the foreign commerce of the
United States, so long as the standard has a legitimate domestic
objective, such as the protection of safety, and does not operate in a
manner that excludes imports that meet this objective. 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 proposed rule and
determined that it will enhance safety and is not considered an
unnecessary obstacle to trade.
Unfunded Mandates Assessment
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-
4) 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
(in 1995 dollars) 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.'' The FAA currently
uses an inflation-adjusted value of $143.1 million in lieu of $100
million.
This proposed rule does not contain such a mandate; therefore, the
requirements of Title II of the Act do not apply.
Environmental Review
This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1E, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and Procedures,'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.
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, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS
0
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]
0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9X, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 7, 2013, and effective September 15,
2013, is amended as follows:
Paragraph 3000 Subpart B--Class B Airspace.
* * * * *
AEA PA B Philadelphia, PA [Amended]
Philadelphia International Airport, PA (Primary Airport)
(Lat. 39[deg]52'20'' N., long. 75[deg]14'27'' W.)
Northeast Philadelphia Airport, PA
(Lat. 40[deg]04'55'' N., long. 75[deg]00'38'' W.)
Cross Keys Airport, NJ
(Lat. 39[deg]42'20'' N., long. 75[deg]01'59'' W.)
Boundaries.
By removing the current description of Area G and adding in its
place:
Area G. That airspace extending upward from 3,500 feet MSL to
and including 7,000 feet MSL within a 20-mile radius of PHL,
excluding that airspace south of a line beginning at the
intersection of the PHL 20-mile radius and the 158[deg] bearing from
PHL, thence direct to the intersection of the PHL 17.9-mile radius
and the 138[deg] bearing from PHL, and that airspace bounded by a
line beginning at the intersection of the PHL 17.9-mile radius and
the 138[deg] bearing from PHL, thence direct to the intersection of
the PHL 15-mile radius and the 141[deg] bearing from PHL, thence
direct to the intersection of the Cross Keys Airport (17N) 1.5-mile
radius and the 212[deg] bearing from 17N, thence clockwise via the
1.5-mile radius of 17N to the 257[deg] bearing from 17N, thence
direct to the intersection of the 17N 1.5-mile radius and the
341[deg] bearing from 17N, thence clockwise via the 1.5-mile radius
of 17N to the 011[deg] bearing from 17N, thence direct to the
intersection of the PHL 15-mile radius and the 127[deg] bearing from
PHL, thence direct to the intersection of the PHL 20-mile radius and
the 118[deg] bearing from PHL, and Areas A, B, C, D, E and F.
* * * * *
Issued in Washington, DC, on December 11, 2013.
Ellen Crum,
Acting Manager, Airspace Policy and Regulations Group.
[FR Doc. 2013-30086 Filed 12-18-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P