Establishment of Class C Airspace and Revocation of Class D Airspace, Orlando Sanford International Airport, FL; and Modification of the Orlando International Airport Class B Airspace Area, FL, 76140-76148 [05-24433]
Download as PDF
76140
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 246 / Friday, December 23, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
the United States in a manner that will
prevent pest infestation.
(2) The fragrant pears may be
imported only under a permit issued by
APHIS in accordance with § 319.56–4.
(3) Each shipment of pears must be
accompanied by a phytosanitary
certificate issued by the national plant
protection organization of China stating
that the conditions of this section have
been met and that the shipment has
been inspected and found free of the
pests listed in this section.
(Approved by the Office of Management and
Budget under control number 0579–0227)
Done in Washington, DC, this 19th day of
December 2005.
Kevin Shea,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 05–24423 Filed 12–22–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–34–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 71
[Docket No. FAA–2005–21381; Airspace
Docket No. 05–ASW–2]
RIN 2120–AA66
Establishment of Area Navigation
Routes; Southwestern and South
Central United States
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule; correction.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This action corrects an error
in the legal description of an Area
Navigation (RNAV) route listed in a
final rule published in the Federal
Register on December 15, 2005 (70 FR
74197), Airspace Docket No. 05–ASW–
2.
EFFECTIVE DATE: 0901 UTC, February 16,
2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Steve Rohring, Airspace and Rules,
Office of System Operations Airspace
and AIM, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone: (202) 267–8783.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
History
On December 15, 2005, a final rule for
Airspace Docket No. 05–ASW–2 was
published in the Federal Register (70
FR 74197). This rule established three
RNAV routes (Q–20, Q–22, and Q–24)
over the Southwestern and South
Central United States. In the description
for Q–20, the latitude for the HONDS fix
was inadvertently listed as lat. 33°33′60″
N. rather than lat. 33°34′00″ N. This
action corrects that error.
Correction to Final Rule
Accordingly, pursuant to the
authority delegated to me, the legal
description for Q–20 as published in the
Federal Register on December 15, 2005
(70 FR 74197), and incorporated by
reference in 14 CFR 71.1, are corrected
as follows:
PART 71—[AMENDED]
§ 71.1
*
[Amended]
*
*
*
long.
long.
long.
long.
long.
105°40′41″
104°51′12″
103°56′00″
101°19′30″
099°49′03″
*
Q–20 CNX TO JCT [CORRECTED]
CNX ..................................................................................................
HONDS .............................................................................................
UNNOS .............................................................................................
FUSCO .............................................................................................
JCT ...................................................................................................
*
*
*
*
*
ACTION:
Issued in Washington, DC, on December
19, 2005.
Edith V. Parish,
Manager, Airspace and Rules.
[FR Doc. 05–24432 Filed 12–22–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 71
[Docket No. FAA–2005–20700; Airspace
Docket No. 04–AWA–8]
erjones on PROD1PC68 with RULES
RIN 2120–AA66
Establishment of Class C Airspace and
Revocation of Class D Airspace,
Orlando Sanford International Airport,
FL; and Modification of the Orlando
International Airport Class B Airspace
Area, FL
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
AGENCY:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:34 Dec 22, 2005
Jkt 208001
VORTAC ........
FIX ..................
WP .................
WP .................
VORTAC ........
(lat.
(lat.
(lat.
(lat.
(lat.
34°22′01″
33°34′00″
32°57′00″
31°11′02″
30°35′53″
Final rule.
SUMMARY: This action establishes Class
C airspace at the Orlando Sanford
International Airport (SFB), FL; revokes
the existing Sanford, FL, Class D
airspace area and its associated Class E
airspace extension; and modifies the
existing Orlando International Airport
(MCO), FL, Class B airspace area. The
FAA is taking this action to improve the
flow of air traffic, enhance safety, and
reduce the potential for midair collision
in the Orlando, FL, terminal area.
EFFECTIVE DATE: 0901 UTC, February 16,
2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul
Gallant, Airspace and Rules, Office of
System Operations Airspace and AIM,
Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202)
267–8783.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On August 8, 2005, the FAA
published in the Federal Register a
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
N.,
N.,
N.,
N.,
N.,
W.)
W.)
W.)
W.)
W.)
notice of proposed rulemaking to
modify the Orlando International
Airport, FL, Class B airspace area,
establish the Orlando Sanford
International Airport Class C airspace,
and revoke the existing Sanford Airport
Class D airspace (70 FR 45599). The
FAA proposed to realign the MCO Class
B airspace area (within the existing
lateral boundaries) due to the
commissioning of runway 17L/35R; to
ensure that MCO arrivals and departures
are retained within Class B airspace;
and adjust the configuration of the Class
B airspace area to accommodate the
Orlando Sanford International Airport
Class C airspace area. The FAA
proposed to establish the SFB Class C
airspace area to enhance safety and
improve the management of air traffic in
the terminal area.
Interested parties were invited to
participate in this rulemaking effort by
submitting written comments on the
proposal. In response to the NPRM, the
FAA received 20 written comments.
Many of the commenters identified
themselves as pilots who operate
E:\FR\FM\23DER1.SGM
23DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 246 / Friday, December 23, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
erjones on PROD1PC68 with RULES
within, or through, the local area. All
comments received were considered
before making a determination on the
final rule. An analysis of the comments
received and the FAA’s responses are
contained in the ‘‘Discussion of
Comments’’ section, below.
Discussion of Comments
Three commenters (a commercial
carrier, a flight instructor, and a local
flying club) wrote in support of the
proposed action. The remaining
commenters objected to various aspects
of the proposal, with most opposition
directed at the proposed establishment
of Class C airspace at SFB.
One commenter felt that changes to
the MCO Class B to accommodate the
proposed SFB Class C airspace might be
unsafe. Concern was expressed that
modification of the east-west visual
flight rules (VFR) flyway between SFB
and Orlando Executive Airport would
compress traffic due to the locations of
VFR practice areas and the Bithlo
television towers.
FAA Response: The FAA does not
agree. The modification of the MCO
Class B airspace area to accommodate
the SFB Class C airspace will not
adversely impact operations to or from
MCO. In addition, raising the floor of
Class B airspace from 1,600 feet MSL to
2,000 feet MSL around Orlando
Executive Airport will provide
additional airspace for VFR aircraft to
utilize while remaining below the floor
of the MCO Class B airspace. The eastwest flyway will be moved only one or
two miles south of its current location
and will remain north of the Bithlo
towers and north of the Lake Apopka
practice area. The modifications will
provide additional flyway and transition
airspace for VFR aircraft as compared to
the present airspace configuration.
A number of commenters, including
the Aircraft Owners and Pilots
Association (AOPA) cited the excellent
safety record at SFB as evidence that
Class C airspace is not needed at that
location.
FAA Response: The FAA agrees that
SFB has had an excellent safety record.
However, during calendar year 2004,
SFB experienced an increase in runway
incursions. During calendar year 2005,
SFB undertook proactive measures that
successfully reduced the number of
runway incursions. Based on growing
passenger enplanements, traffic mix,
and complexity, the FAA believes that
the designation of Class C airspace at
SFB is a necessary step toward
maintaining that record by further
improving safety and enhancing the
management of air traffic operations in
the area. Receiving Class C radar
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:34 Dec 22, 2005
Jkt 208001
services will improve safety for aircraft
operating at SFB and for VFR aircraft
transitioning the area.
One commenter said the FAA should
pursue nonregulatory alternatives to
Class C airspace at SFB such as: Adjust
staffing to address safety and controller
workload concerns; modify the MCO
Class B airspace area or the existing SFB
Class D airspace area to contain aircraft
beyond the four-mile final; and delegate
the sequencing of SFB arrivals to MCO
approach control by letter of agreement
rather than by establishing additional
regulatory airspace.
FAA Response: FAA policy requires
that, prior to considering designation of
Class C airspace at a given location,
nonregulatory alternatives that would
provide an acceptable level of safety
must be utilized such as: Improved
radar services, pilot/controller
education programs, and safety
seminars. As discussed in the NPRM, a
number of nonrulemaking actions were
taken to address safety in the SFB area,
including: (1) The installation of Digital
Bright Radar Tower Equipment at SFB
ATCT; (2) annual Operation Rain Check
pilot-controller forums; (3) periodic user
group meetings and safety meetings; (4)
procedural initiatives to keep larger
arriving aircraft at higher altitudes away
from slower traffic and rerouting of
arrivals to avoid a flight training area;
(5) set up of standard VFR arrival areas;
and (6) development of various
procedures for more efficient handling
of flight school operations in the
Orlando area. These nonregulatory
efforts have, indeed, contributed to
enhanced safety at SFB. However, traffic
conflicts in the SFB area remain a
concern and the FAA believes that,
considering rising passenger
enplanements, and the traffic mix and
volume in the Central Florida terminal
area, additional action is needed in the
form of Class C airspace to maintain the
excellent safety record. The
commenter’s suggestion to adjust
staffing as a means to reduce SFB tower
controller workload would not be
feasible to resolve the problem. A
concern at SFB is the mix of small and
large aircraft that use runway 9L/27R
and operate in the airspace along the
SFB final approach and departure areas.
One controller works runway 9L/27R
traffic, and splitting the position
responsibilities is not possible.
Therefore, additional staffing would not
alleviate the workload concerns.
Another suggested alternative for
reducing SFB Tower workload was to
delegate the sequencing of SFB arrivals
to MCO approach control by a letter of
agreement rather than establishing Class
C airspace. However, such a procedure
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
76141
would not eliminate initial call-ups to
the Tower by VFR aircraft operating in
the area. It was also suggested that,
instead of establishing Class C airspace
at SFB, the FAA should expand the
MCO Class B or the SFB Class D
airspace areas to address the issue of
SFB air carrier arrivals exiting Class B
or D airspace prior to the four-mile
point on final approach. Expanding the
MCO Class B airspace area to cover this
airspace would not be appropriate
because Class B airspace is not needed
in that area to support MCO operations.
Additionally, expanding Class B
airspace to encompass SFB final
approach operations would hamper VFR
operations at SFB by placing additional
regulatory requirements on VFR pilots
operating at SFB. Class D airspace
design criteria do not allow for the
length of extensions that would be
required to contain the SFB ILS final
approach course. The FAA believes that
enhanced traffic flow and increased
safety will be achieved through the
designation of the SFB Class C airspace
area.
Several commenters questioned the
adequacy of air traffic controller staffing
levels to handle the workload resulting
from the modification of the MCO Class
B and designation of the SFB Class C
airspace.
FAA Response: Staffing and
equipment resources are already in
place to support the MCO Class B
modifications and the establishment of
the SFB Class C airspace. Procedures
have been developed to operate SFB
with Class C airspace. Further, MCO
TRACON has added an additional sector
and radio frequency, and requested an
additional VFR code block, in
preparation for the expected additional
volume to be generated by the airspace
changes. Class C airspace will generate
an increased workload for the SFB
Clearance Delivery position, but that
position is prepared to handle the
increase. Staffing and equipment levels
are adequate to provide all Class C
services without impacting safety or
efficiency and the FAA does not expect
staffing to be an issue for MCO or SFB.
However, should circumstances arise
that indicate a need for additional
resources, action will be taken to obtain
them.
One commenter questioned the
justification for Class C airspace at SFB
based on the passenger enplanement
count, stating the enplanement data
alone do not tell the full story, and two
commenters questioned the validity of
Class C airspace at SFB because the SFB
operations count has declined below the
criteria threshold.
E:\FR\FM\23DER1.SGM
23DER1
erjones on PROD1PC68 with RULES
76142
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 246 / Friday, December 23, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
FAA Response: The FAA agrees that
enplanements are not the sole factor in
determining a need for Class C airspace.
Instrument operations and passenger
enplanement data are used to identify
an airport as a possible candidate for
Class C airspace. For an airport to be
identified as a candidate for Class C
airspace, the airport must be serviced by
an operational airport traffic control
tower and a radar approach control. In
addition, the airport must meet at least
ONE of the following: (1) An annual
instrument operations count of 75,000 at
the primary airport; (2) an annual
instrument operations count of 100,000
at the primary and secondary airports in
the terminal area hub; or (3) an annual
count of 250,000 enplaned passengers at
the primary airport. These criteria only
identify an airport as a candidate for
possible Class C airspace designation.
Since the enplaned passenger count for
SFB exceeds 600,000, it is a legitimate
candidate for Class C airspace. A range
of other factors must also be considered
when determining if a need for Class C
airspace exists. However, a need to
enhance safety is the main
consideration in evaluating these
factors. SFB ranks as the 24th busiest
tower in the United States. SFB serves
a combination of large aircraft with high
passenger counts mixed with general
aviation operations, and a high level of
flight training activities. The FAA
believes that the SFB Class C airspace
area is justified to provide a safer
environment for this mix of operations.
The Greater Orlando Airports
Authority (GOAA) expressed concerns
about the impact on safety for pilots
flying to Orlando Executive Airport. The
GOAA noted that Orlando Executive
Airport, with Class D airspace, will be
located between two more restrictive
types of airspace; that is, Class B at
MCO and Class C at SFB. The GOAA
believes that the FAA did not use a
regional approach in studying the
terminal area airspace, and requested
that the FAA implement Class C
airspace at Orlando Executive
concurrent with the designation of Class
C airspace at SFB.
FAA Response: The FAA does not
agree with GOAA’s concerns regarding
the extent or validity of the airspace
study. FAA directives list the factors to
be examined in the airspace staff study
when considering Class B and Class C
airspace proposals. These include an
examination of VFR and IFR traffic
flows into, out of, and through the
terminal area; air traffic at each satellite
airport in the area; and a description of
overall air traffic operations in the
overall area. Considering the close
proximity of Orlando Executive Airport,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:34 Dec 22, 2005
Jkt 208001
MCO, and SFB, operations at each
airport must be taken into account when
examining the terminal area. Due to the
size of the area encompassed by the
MCO Class B airspace, a study of air
traffic operations and airspace in that
area must necessarily include a regional
perspective. In 2003, the FAA
completed a preliminary staff study to
examine the need for Class C airspace at
Orlando Executive Airport. However,
the instrument operations count for the
airport dropped below the 75,000
criteria, so further action was not
pursued. The FAA believes that
implementation of Class C airspace at
Orlando Executive Airport at this time
would be overly restrictive to VFR
operations at Orlando Executive
Airport. It should be noted that FAA
policy directives call for terminal
airspace designations to be reviewed
every two years; therefore, airspace
requirements at Orlando Executive
Airport will be subject to further review.
The FAA does not believe that this
rulemaking action will adversely affect
safety for pilots operating to or from
Orlando Executive Airport, nor should
pilots experience delays as a result. A
similar situation exists in southern
Florida and safety has not been
compromised.
One pilot wrote that the proposed
SFB Class C airspace configuration
might be unsafe, citing the amount of
restricted or otherwise controlled
airspace already in the area (R–2910,
MCO Class B, Daytona Beach Class C,
etc.). The commenter objected to placing
Class C airspace around SFB that would
extend farther north than the current
MCO Class B airspace boundary. This
would crowd VFR aircraft into less
space, particularly to the northwest of
the proposed outer ring where two
towers extend to over 1,700 feet MSL.
FAA Response: The commenter is
incorrect regarding the extent of the SFB
10-NM ring. The original configuration
of the proposed SFB Class C airspace
did include a full 10-NM ring north of
the airport. However, based on feedback
from the ad hoc committee meetings,
and as described in the NPRM, the
proposed SFB Class C airspace design
was changed so that the 10-NM ring was
eliminated north of the current northern
boundary of the MCO Class B airspace
area along latitude 28°53′00″ N.
Therefore, Class C airspace will not
extend into the airspace in question
near the towers nor will the SFB Class
C airspace result in additional crowding
of VFR aircraft between the Daytona
Beach Class C airspace area and the
current northern edge of the MCO Class
B airspace area. Similarly, to the south
of SFB, the Class C 10-NM ring was
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
cutoff along latitude 28°41′36″ N. This
modification provides additional
airspace in the east-west VFR flyway
located between Orlando Executive and
SFB.
A majority of the commenters stated
that the SFB Class C airspace would
adversely impact, and place undue
burdens on, VFR operations to, from,
and transiting the terminal area. Several
writers commented that they currently
are able to operate to and from SFB
without problems or delays. Several
commenters felt that the existing MCO
Class B airspace dominates the region
and currently restricts VFR flying and
that adding the SFB Class C airspace
would make flying in the area more
confusing. Commenters were also
concerned that the implementation of
Class C airspace might cause congestion
and bottlenecks on approach control
frequencies and otherwise result in
limitations on general aviation access to
the airspace.
FAA Response: The FAA does not
agree. Current traffic routings and
proposed Class C routings were
compared and it was found that the new
Class C airspace would have minimal
negative impact on users. Procedures for
the Class C airspace operation will
allow SFB users to continue flying
much as they do today. The FAA
believes that this rule will provide an
additional level of safety for VFR
aircraft operating at SFB and in the
Orlando terminal area. A minimal
increase in flying miles (five miles
further west or east of SFB) may be
required for pilots desiring to transit
outside the SFB Class C and MCO Class
B airspace areas. With Class C airspace,
all VFR aircraft flying to SFB will
receive radar service. ATC will utilize
three arrival sectors for handling
inbound aircraft. This will result in less
difficulty arriving at SFB and may
reduce flying time to enter the traffic
pattern. The modifications to the MCO
Class B airspace will also provide
additional airspace for VFR aircraft in
the area to the north of Orlando
Executive Airport and south of the SFB
Class C airspace area. A new northsouth VFR flyway is being added to the
east of the SFB Class C airspace area.
The FAA is also establishing two new
VFR waypoints (VPAPO southwest of
SFB at lat. 28°40′15″ N., long. 81°31′31″
W.; and VPBIT southeast of SFB at lat.
28°39′54″ N., long. 81°01′18″ W.). The
new waypoints will assist VFR
navigation through the expanded eastwest VFR flyway that lies between
Orlando Executive Airport and SFB, and
the north-south flyways to the east and
west of the SFB Class C airspace area.
The FAA will allow SFB VFR
E:\FR\FM\23DER1.SGM
23DER1
erjones on PROD1PC68 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 246 / Friday, December 23, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
departures, on pilot request, to remain
on SFB ATCT frequency and terminate
service at the 5-mile Class C airspace
ring. The FAA also will continue the
procedure whereby departing VFR
aircraft at Orlando Executive Airport
may request a transponder code on the
ground. Currently, most Orlando
Executive VFR northbound departures
fly around the SFB Class D airspace.
The addition of the SFB Class C airspace
will only slightly increase flying miles
as noted above. Since the changes
implemented by this rulemaking action
lie totally within the existing MCO
mode C veil, no additional aircraft
equipment requirements are imposed in
order to operate in the area. As
discussed under the comments
regarding staffing, above, the FAA has
taken steps to ensure that MCO
approach control is prepared to handle
the workload generated by the
implementation of the SFB Class C
airspace area.
A suggestion was made that the floor
of the SFB Class C airspace in the 5–10
mile ring be raised from 1,300 feet MSL
to 1,600 feet MSL to allow transiting
VFR aircraft to fly beneath the area at
1,500 feet MSL.
FAA Response: The FAA does not
agree with the suggestion. The crossing
altitudes at the final approach fixes are
1,500 feet MSL and 1,600 feet MSL.
Raising the floor as suggested would
result in conflicts that the Class C
airspace is designed to eliminate.
One commenter suggested that a
north-south VFR flyway be established
directly over SFB.
FAA Response: The FAA does not
agree. Currently, aircraft transitioning
over SFB at 1,500 feet MSL, as approved
by SFB Tower, total only about five per
day. With the implementation of the
SFB Class C airspace area, a transition
over SFB at 2,500 feet MSL would be
possible for aircraft in contact with
MCO approach control. A VFR flyway
directly over SFB would not be feasible.
VFR flyways provide general flight
paths for pilots planning flights into, out
of, through, or near complex terminal
airspace so as to avoid Class B airspace.
Flyway altitudes must avoid airspace
that requires prior authorization or
clearance to enter. A flyway over SFB
would result in departures being
restricted below the flyway altitude
until clear of the flyway. The airspace
between 2,000 feet MSL and 3,000 feet
MSL over SFB is used to transition
arrivals and departures to/from Orlando
Executive Airport. Due to the
complexity of the airspace in the SFB
area, the suggested flyway is not feasible
because it would impact SFB
operations, and/or require pilots to
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:34 Dec 22, 2005
Jkt 208001
obtain a Class B clearance or establish
communications in order to enter Class
C airspace.
Several commenters, including
AOPA, argued that the FAA did not
follow the ad hoc committee process,
ignored public input, and/or did not
obtain sufficient user involvement in
developing this airspace proposal.
FAA Response: Substantial user input
was obtained in developing the MCO/
SFB airspace proposal. Ad hoc user
meetings were held on January 14,
February 25, and March 17, 2003. The
FAA did encounter a delay in mailing
of the announcement of the two
Informal Airspace Meetings held in
November 2003. As a result,
supplemental notifications were made
to various organizations via e-mail and
the information was displayed on the
MCO Tower web site. The NPRM also
provided a 60-day comment period,
which resulted in 20 written comments
being submitted to the FAA.
Additionally, discussions on the project
have been included at regular local
airport user meetings since early 2003.
The comment that the FAA ignored
public input is without basis. In fact, the
NPRM specifically addressed at least
seven specific issues that were raised in
a letter submitted to the FAA by an
aviation organization as a result of
public meetings. The NPRM also
discussed a number of
recommendations that resulted from the
ad hoc committee meetings and
included issues discussed at the
November 2003 Informal Airspace
Meetings.
The following is a summary of the ad
hoc committee recommendations:
1. Reduce the Class C 10-mile ring
north of SFB to align with the current
Class B boundary.
2. Include a cutout from the Class C
airspace area to accommodate the Cedar
Knoll Flying Ranch Airport.
3. Provide a procedure allowing SFB
VFR departures to remain with the
Tower and terminate services at the
five-mile ring, below the Class C
airspace outer area.
4. Permit Orlando Executive Airport
VFR departures to obtain a transponder
code on the ground.
5. Establish an uncontrolled VFR
flyway over SFB at 2,500 feet MSL and
a new flyway east of the proposed SFB
Class C airspace.
6. Realign the eastern edge of the
proposed Class C airspace to follow the
shore of Lake Harney.
7. Raise the floor of the proposed SFB
Class C from 1,300 feet MSL to 1,600
feet MSL within the 5–10 mile ring to
enable VFR aircraft to fly beneath it at
1,500 feet MSL.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
76143
8. Establish Class C airspace at
Orlando Executive Airport concurrent
with the SFB Class C airspace
implementation.
With the exception of the VFR flyway
over SFB, the alignment of the Class C
boundary along Lake Harney, the
requested 1,600 feet MSL floor in the 5–
10 mile ring, and the designation of
Class C airspace at Orlando Executive
Airport, the above recommendations
were adopted.
The Rule
This action amends Title 14 Code of
Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 to modify the MCO Class B
airspace area, establish the SFB Class C
airspace area, and revoke the SFB Class
D airspace area. The specifics of this
action (depicted on the attached chart)
are summarized in the following
paragraphs. In addition, this rule
revokes the Class E airspace extension
to the SFB Class D airspace area.
Orlando Sanford International Airport
Class C Airspace
The Sanford Class C airspace area is
described as follows:
That airspace extending upward from
the surface to but not including 3,000
feet MSL within a 5-mile radius of the
Sanford International Airport (SFB),
excluding that airspace from the surface
to but not including 700 feet MSL in the
vicinity of Cedar Knoll Flying Ranch
Airport within the area beginning at lat.
28°50′00″ N., long. 81°10′00″ W., thence
clockwise along the SFB 5-mile radius
arc to lat. 28°43′20″ N., long. 81°10′00″
W., thence north to the point of
beginning; and that airspace extending
upward from 1,300 feet MSL to but not
including 3,000 feet MSL within the
area beginning northeast of the primary
airport at the intersection of the SFB 10mile radius arc and lat. 28°53′00″ N.,
thence clockwise along the SFB 10-mile
radius arc to lat. 28°41′36″ N., then west
along lat. 28°41′36″ N. to the
intersection of the SFB 10-mile radius
arc, then clockwise along the SFB 10mile radius arc to lat. 28°53′00″ N., then
east along lat. 28°53′00″ N., to the point
of beginning.
The SFB Class C airspace area will be
effective during times when the Orlando
Sanford International ATCT is in
operation. These times will be
published in the appropriate volume of
the Airport/Facility Directory.
The Sanford Class C airspace will
replace the existing Sanford Class D
airspace area, which will be revoked
through this rule. In addition, although
not addressed in the NPRM, this action
also revokes the existing Class E
airspace extension to the SFB Class D
E:\FR\FM\23DER1.SGM
23DER1
76144
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 246 / Friday, December 23, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
erjones on PROD1PC68 with RULES
airspace area. Since the Class D airspace
area is being revoked, the Class E
extension is no longer required.
Orlando International Airport Class B
Airspace
This action modifies several areas
within the Orlando Class B airspace to
accommodate the new Sanford Class C
airspace area; reflect the adjustment of
the Orlando International Airport ARP
as a result of the commissioning of the
fourth runway at Orlando International
Airport; and provide additional Class B
airspace to ensure that Orlando
International Airport arrivals and
departures are contained within Class B
airspace. The existing outer-most
boundaries of the Orlando Class B
airspace area remain unchanged by
these modifications.
The following describes the revisions
to the Orlando Class B airspace area:
Area A. Area A is recentered on lat.
28°25′46″ N., long. 81°18′32″ W. This
represents a shift of Area A slightly to
the east to recenter the area on the
revised Orlando International Airport
ARP, which was adjusted due to the
addition of the fourth runway at
Orlando International.
Area B. The eastern boundary of Area
B is shifted approximately 1 NM east to
long. 81°10′00″ W. to accommodate the
new Orlando International Airport
runway.
Area C. The section of Area C in the
vicinity of Sanford International Airport
is removed and replaced by the Sanford
Class C airspace area up to but not
including 3,000 feet MSL, and by Area
E from 3,000 feet MSL up to and
including 10,000 feet MSL. Area C in
the vicinity of Orlando Executive
Airport is reduced in size. The airspace
removed from Area C to the west, north,
and northeast of Orlando Executive
Airport is incorporated into Area D with
its higher Class B airspace floor of 2,000
feet MSL. This change increases the
amount of airspace available to VFR
aircraft allowing them to utilize that
area below 2,000 feet and remain
outside of Class B airspace. Also, the
eastern boundary of the Area C
segments located to the north and south
of Orlando International Airport is
modified by moving the eastern
boundary one degree east to long.
81°10′00″ W. to accommodate the new
runway.
Area D. Area D is expanded in size in
the vicinity of Orlando Executive
Airport by incorporating the airspace
removed from Area C, as described
above. This change also raises the floor
of Class B airspace in the affected area
from 1,600 feet MSL to 2,000 feet MSL,
providing additional VFR flyway
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:34 Dec 22, 2005
Jkt 208001
airspace between Sanford International
Airport and Orlando Executive Airport
while still protecting Orlando
International Airport arrivals. Also, the
eastern boundary of Area D is moved
eastward to long. 81°10′00″ W. to
accommodate the new runway at
Orlando International Airport.
Area E. The boundary of Area E to the
east of Orlando International, currently
defined by long. 81°11′00″ W., is moved
eastward one degree to long. 81°10′00″
W. This modification accommodates the
new Orlando International Airport
runway. Additionally, Area E is
expanded in the vicinity of Sanford so
that Area E overlies the Sanford Class C
airspace area and incorporates the
airspace from 3,000 feet MSL up to and
including 10,000 feet MSL over Sanford,
that was formerly in Area C. Also, the
southern boundary of Area E, located to
the south of Sanford, is moved further
south by approximately 2.5 NM to align
it with the southern boundary of the
Sanford Class C airspace area, along lat.
28°41′36″ N.
Area F. That airspace described as
Area F in the existing Orlando Class B
airspace area is renamed ‘‘Area G.’’ A
new Area F is inserted to the west of
Orlando International, adjacent to, and
west of, Area D and Area E. This new
Area F consists of that airspace located
between long, 81°27′30″ W. and long.
81°32′00″ W., and bounded by the ORL
VORTAC 30-mile radius on the south,
and by lat. 28°53′00″ N., on the north.
The floor of the new Area F is set at
4,000 feet MSL instead of the 6,000 feet
MSL floor in the existing Area F. The
lower floor provided by the new Area F
ensures that departures climbing
westbound off MCO and arrivals on
downwind leg for landing at Orlando
International remain within Class B
airspace.
Area G. The remaining sections of the
existing Area F are renamed Area G as
a result of the addition of a new Area
F, described above.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
FAA has determined that this final rule:
(1) Will generate benefits that justify its
minimal 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) will not have a
significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities; (4) will not
constitute a barrier to international
trade; and (5) will 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.
The FAA proposed to change the
Orlando Class B and the Orlando
Sanford Airport Class D airspace areas.
The Orlando Class B airspace area
modification will maintain the 10,000
feet MSL airspace ceiling and redefine
the lateral limits of several of the
existing subareas to improve the
management of air traffic operations in
the Orlando terminal area. The Orlando
Sanford Airport Class D airspace area
upgrade to a Class C airspace area will
lower the airspace area from 3,000 to
1,600 feet MSL and will include a
radius of 4.4 NM from the Orlando
Sanford Airport up to but not including
1,600 feet MSL.
The FAA has determined that the
changes to the Orlando Class B and the
Orlando Sanford Airport Class D
airspace areas will improve the
operational efficiency while
maintaining aviation safety in the
terminal airspace area. Also, clearer
boundary definition and changes to
lateral and vertical limits of some
subareas will provide additional
airspace for use by VFR aircraft
transitioning to and from satellite
airports. This proposal will impose only
negligible costs on some airspace users
but could potentially reduce
circumnavigation costs to other airspace
users.
The final rule will result in negligible
additional administrative costs to the
FAA and no additional operational costs
for personnel or equipment to the
agency. Printing of aeronautical charts
which reflect the changes to the Class B
area and the upgrade to Class C airspace
area will be accomplished during a
scheduled chart printing, and will result
in no additional costs for plate
modification and updating of charts.
Furthermore, no staffing changes will be
required to maintain the modified Class
B airspace area and the upgraded Class
D airspace area. Potential increase in
FAA operations workload could be
absorbed by current personnel and
equipment.
E:\FR\FM\23DER1.SGM
23DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 246 / Friday, December 23, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
erjones on PROD1PC68 with RULES
In view of the negligible cost of
compliance, enhanced aviation safety,
and improved operational efficiency,
the FAA has determined that the final
rule will 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 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 (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 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.
The FAA has determined that the
final rule will have a de minimus
impact on small entities. All
commercial and general aviation
operators who presently use the
Orlando International Airport are
equipped to operate within the modified
Class B airspace area. As for aircraft that
regularly fly through the Orlando
Sanford International Airport Class D
airspace area, since the airport is
situated within the established Orlando
Mode C Veil, all aircraft should already
have the necessary equipment to
transition the modified Class B airspace
area. Therefore, there will be no
additional equipment cost to these
entities.
Accordingly, pursuant to the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C.
605(b), as the Administrator of the
Federal Aviation Administration, I
certify that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:34 Dec 22, 2005
Jkt 208001
International Trade Impact Assessment
Trade Impact Assessment
76145
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113,
40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959–
1963 Comp., p. 389.
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
(proposed/final) rule and determined
that it will have only a domestic impact
and therefore no affect on any tradesensitive activity.
§ 71.1
Unfunded Mandates Assementment
Boundaries
Area A—That airspace extending upward
from the surface to and including 10,000 feet
MSL within a 5–NM radius from the Orlando
International Airport.
Area B—That airspace extending upward
from 900 feet MSL to and including 10,000
feet MSL beginning at a point of the
intersection of State Road (S.R.) 423 (John
Young Parkway SW of ORL VORTAC) and
Interstate 4, thence northeast along Interstate
4 to the intersection of Interstate 4 and S.R.
441 (Orange Blossom Trail), thence direct to
the intersection of Lake Underhill Road and
Palmer Street, thence east along Lake
Underhill Road to the intersection of Lake
Underhill Road and the Central Florida
Greenway (S.R. 417), thence direct to lat.
28°29′22″ N., long. 81°10′00″ W. (the Stanton
Power Plant), thence south to the intersection
of the ORL VORTAC 14-mile radius arc,
thence clockwise along the ORL VORTAC 14mile radius arc to the intersection of S.R. 423,
thence north along S.R. 423 to the point of
beginning.
Area C—That airspace extending upward
from 1,600 feet MSL to and including 10,000
feet MSL beginning at a point of the
intersection of Interstate 4 and the Orlando
Executive Airport Class D airspace 4.2-mile
radius arc (lat. 28°30′33″ N., long. 81°24′03″
W.), thence clockwise on the Orlando
Executive Airport 4.2-mile radius to
University Blvd., thence east on University
Blvd. to the intersection of S.R. 434, thence
east on lat. 28°35′50″ N. to long. 81°10′00″
W., thence south to lat. 28°29′22″ N., thence
northwest direct to the intersection of Lake
Underhill Road and Central Florida
Greenway (S.R. 417), thence west along Lake
Underhill Road to the intersection of Palmer
Street, thence southwest to the point of
beginning. Also, that airspace south of the
primary airport extending upward from 1,600
feet MSL to and including 10,000 feet MSL
beginning at the point of intersection of long.
81°24′06″ W., and the ORL VORTAC 14-mile
radius arc, thence counterclockwise along the
ORL VORTAC 14-mile radius arc to the
intersection of long. 81°10′00″ W., thence
south to the intersection of the ORL VORTAC
20-mile radius arc, thence clockwise along
the ORL VORTAC 20-mile radius arc to long.
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.’’ The
FAA currently uses an inflationadjusted value of $120.7 million in lieu
of $100 million.
This final rule does not contain such
a mandate. The requirements of Title II
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 action.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71
Airspace, Incorporation by reference,
Navigation (air).
The Amendment
In consideration of the foregoing, the
Federal Aviation Administration
amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:
I
PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A,
B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND
REPORTING POINTS
1. The authority citation for part 71
continues to read as follows:
I
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
[Amended]
2. The incorporation by reference in
14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.9N,
Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, dated September 1, 2005, and
effective September 15, 2005, is
amended as follows:
I
Paragraph 3000
Class B Airspace
*
*
*
*
*
ASO FL B Orlando, FL [Revised]
Orlando International Airport (MCO)
(Primary Airport)
(Lat. 28°25′46″ N., long. 81°18′32″ W.)
Orlando VORTAC (ORL)
(Lat. 28°32′34″ N., long. 81°20′06″ W.)
E:\FR\FM\23DER1.SGM
23DER1
76146
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 246 / Friday, December 23, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
erjones on PROD1PC68 with RULES
81°24′06″ W., thence north to the point of
beginning.
Area D—That airspace extending upward
from 2,000 feet MSL to and including 10,000
feet MSL beginning at a point of the
intersection of Interstate 4 and long.
81°27′30″ W., thence north to lat. 28°41′36″
N., thence east to long. 81°10′00″ W., thence
south to lat. 28°35′50″ N., thence west to the
intersection of S.R. 434 and University Blvd.,
thence west on University Blvd. to the
Orlando Executive Airport 4.2-mile radius
arc, thence counterclockwise on the Orlando
Executive Airport 4.2-mile radius arc to the
intersection of Interstate 4, southwest of the
ORL VORTAC, thence west on Interstate 4 to
the intersection of S.R. 423, thence south
along S.R. 423 to the intersection of the ORL
VORTAC 14-mile radius arc, thence
counterclockwise along the ORL VORTAC
14-mile radius arc to long. 81°24′06″ W.,
thence south to the intersection of the ORL
VORTAC 20-mile radius arc, thence
clockwise along the ORL VORTAC 20-mile
radius arc to the intersection of long.
81°27′30″ W., thence north to the point of
beginning.
Area E—That airspace extending upward
from 3,000 feet MSL to and including 10,000
feet MSL beginning at a point of the
intersection of lat. 28°41′36″ N., long.
81°27′30″ W., thence north to the intersection
of lat. 28°53′00″ N., thence east to the
intersection of the MCO Mode C Veil 30–NM
radius arc, thence southeast along the MCO
Mode C Veil 30–NM radius arc to the
intersection of the power lines at lat.
28°50′20″ N., thence southeast along these
power lines to lat. 28°41′36″ N., thence west
to long. 81°05′09″ W., thence south along the
Florida Power transmission lines to the
intersection of Highway 50 at lat. 28°32′10″
N., long. 81°03′35″ W., thence south to the
Bee Line Expressway at lat. 28°27′05″ N.,
long. 81°03′45″ W., thence west along the Bee
Line Expressway to the intersection of lat.
28°27′00″ N., long. 81°04′40″ W., thence
south to the intersection of the ORL VORTAC
30-mile radius arc, thence clockwise along
the ORL VORTAC 30-mile radius arc to long.
81°27′30″ W., thence north on long. 81°27′30″
W., to the intersection of the ORL VORTAC
20-mile radius arc, thence counterclockwise
along the ORL VORTAC 20-mile radius arc
to the intersection of long. 81°10′00″ W.,
thence north to the intersection of lat.
28°41′36″ N., thence west to the point of
beginning.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:34 Dec 22, 2005
Jkt 208001
Area F—That airspace extending upward
from 4,000 feet MSL to and including 10,000
feet MSL beginning south of the primary
airport at the intersection of the ORL
VORTAC 30-mile radius arc and long.
81°27′30″ W., thence clockwise along the
ORL VORTAC 30-mile radius arc to long.
81°32′00″ W., thence north to lat. 28°53′00″
N., thence east to long. 81°27′30″ W., thence
south to the point of beginning.
Area G—That airspace extending upward
from 6,000 feet MSL to and including 10,000
feet MSL beginning south of the primary
airport at the intersection of the ORL
VORTAC 30-mile radius arc and long.
81°32′00″ W., thence clockwise on the ORL
VORTAC 30-mile radius arc to the
intersection of Highway 27, thence north
along Highway 27 to the intersection of
Highway 27 and long. 81°45′00″ W., thence
north along long. 81°45′00″ W., to the
intersection of the ORL VORTAC 24-mile
radius arc, thence clockwise along the ORL
VORTAC 24-mile radius arc to the
intersection of lat. 28°53′00″ N., thence east
to the intersection of long. 81°32′00″ W.,
thence south to the point of beginning. Also
that airspace extending upward from 6,000
feet MSL to and including 10,000 feet MSL
beginning at the Florida Power transmission
lines at lat. 28°41′36″ N., long. 81°05′09″ W.,
thence east along lat. 28°41′36″ N. to the
Florida Power transmission lines at lat.
28°41′36″ N., long. 80°54′26″ W., thence
southeast and south along these power lines
to the intersection of Highway 50, thence
south to the power lines at lat. 28°22′14″ N.,
long. 80°52′30″ W., thence southwest along
these power lines to the intersection of long.
81°04′40″ W., thence north along long.
81°04′40″ W., to the intersection of the Bee
Line Expressway at lat. 28°27′00″ N., long.
81°04′40″ W., thence east along the Bee Line
Expressway to lat. 28°27′05″ N., long.
81°03′45″ W., thence north to the intersection
of Highway 50 and the Florida Power
transmission lines at lat. 28°32′10″ N., long.
81°03′45″ W., thence north along these power
lines to the point of beginning.
(Lat. 28°46′40″ N., long. 81°14′15″ W.)
Cedar Knoll Flying Ranch Airport (Private
Airport)
(Lat. 28°46′55″ N., long. 81°09′33″ W.)
That airspace extending upward from the
surface to but not including 3,000 feet MSL
within a 5-mile radius of the Orlando
Sanford International Airport, excluding that
airspace, from the surface to but not
including 700 feet MSL in the vicinity of
Cedar Knoll Flying Ranch Airport, within the
area beginning at lat. 28°50′00″ N., long.
81°10′00″ W., thence clockwise along the
SFB 5-mile radius arc to lat. 28°43′20″ N.,
long. 81°10′00″ W., thence north to the point
of beginning; and that airspace extending
upward from 1,300 feet MSL to but not
including 3,000 feet MSL within the area
beginning northeast of the primary airport at
the intersection of the SFB 10-mile radius arc
and lat. 28°53′00″ N., thence clockwise along
the SFB 10-mile radius arc to lat 28°41′36″
N., thence westbound to the intersection of
the SFB 10-mile radius arc, thence clockwise
on the SFB 10-mile radius arc to lat.
28°53′00″ N., thence east to the point of
beginning. This Class C airspace area is
effective during the specific days and hours
of operation of the Orlando Sanford
International Airport Tower as established in
advance by Notice to Airmen. The effective
dates and times will thereafter be
continuously published in the Airport/
Facility Directory.
*
*
*
*
*
*
Paragraph 4000
Class C Airspace
*
*
*
*
*
ASO FL C Sanford, FL [New]
Orlando Sanford International Airport (SFB)
(Primary Airport)
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
*
*
*
*
*
Paragraph 5000
Class D Airspace
*
*
*
*
*
ASO FL D
Sanford, FL [Remove]
*
*
*
*
*
Paragraph 6004 Class E Airspace Areas
Designated as an Extension to a Class D
Surface Area
*
*
ASO FL E4
*
*
*
*
Sanford, FL [Remove]
*
*
*
Issued in Washington, DC, on December
20, 2005.
Edith V. Parish,
Manager, Airspace and Rules.
BILLING CODE 4910–13–U
E:\FR\FM\23DER1.SGM
23DER1
76147
[FR Doc. 05–24433 Filed 12–22–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–C
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:01 Dec 22, 2005
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\23DER1.SGM
23DER1
ER23DE05.000
erjones on PROD1PC68 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 246 / Friday, December 23, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
76148
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 246 / Friday, December 23, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 73
[Docket No. FAA–2003–15976; Airspace
Docket No. 03–AWA–5]
RIN 2120–AA66
Establishment of Prohibited Area P–
50; Kings Bay, GA
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This action establishes
Prohibited Area P–50 over the U.S.
Naval Submarine Base, Kings Bay, GA.
The prohibited area replaces a
Temporary Flight Restriction (TFR) that
is currently in effect at that location.
The FAA is taking this action in
response to a request from the U.S. Navy
as part of its efforts to enhance the
security of the Naval Submarine Base,
Kings Bay, GA.
EFFECTIVE DATE: 0901 UTC, February 16,
2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul
Gallant, Airspace and Rules, Office of
System Operations Airspace and AIM,
Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202)
267–8783.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
History
On February 26, 2004, the FAA
published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking to
establish a prohibited area over the U.S.
Naval Submarine Base, Kings Bay, GA
(69 FR 8884). The FAA proposed this
action, at the request of the U.S. Navy,
to enhance the security of the Kings Bay
facility. Interested parties were invited
to participate in this rulemaking effort
by submitting written comments on the
proposal. The comment period ended
April 12, 2004. A total of 124 comments
were received in response to the notice.
All comments received were considered
in this rulemaking action, including six
comments received by the Document
Management System after the closing
date.
erjones on PROD1PC68 with RULES
Discussion of Comments
One commenter wrote in support of
the proposed action. All other
commenters opposed the establishment
of the prohibited area. The following is
a discussion of the substantive
comments received.
Many commenters contended that
there is no credible terrorist threat and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:01 Dec 22, 2005
Jkt 208001
adequate justification has not been
provided for establishing a prohibited
area at Kings Bay, GA.
FAA Response: The purpose of
establishing Prohibited Area P–50 is to
be proactive in preventing terrorism
rather than reactive. The September 11,
2001, attacks identified some
weaknesses in the defense of certain
critical U.S. assets, and some analysts
still claim that necessary steps to
prevent future terrorist attacks have not
been taken. P–50 is just one part of the
U.S. Navy’s integrated, layered defense
plan for the Kings Bay facility. The
submarines berthed at Kings Bay are
vital assets that require continual
protection, not just during periods of
heightened security.
A number of commenters stated that
a prohibited area would do nothing to
enhance actual security at Kings Bay. It
would provide no deterrence to
terrorists because they do not follow the
rules anyway. Commenters expressed
doubt that a prohibited area would
provide adequate time for the Navy to
react to a threat. Further, the area would
only serve to limit the freedom of lawabiding pilots and possibly put an
aircraft at risk of a shoot down in the
event of an inadvertent penetration of
the prohibited area caused by an aircraft
emergency or malfunction, lost pilot, or
some other innocent circumstance.
FAA Response: The FAA agrees that
a prohibited area designation, in itself,
presents no physical impediment to
stop an attack. However, the Navy is
aggressively pursuing a multitude of
defensive measures at Kings Bay to
prevent an airborne attack. Each of these
measures includes the identification of
hostile aircraft. P–50 will enhance the
protection of U.S. assets by reducing
low altitude aircraft overflights of the
facility and provide a better means for
identifying potentially hostile aircraft.
The purpose of P–50, then, is not to
provide a sterile environment for
airborne assets to engage a hostile
aircraft. An aircraft intruding into the
prohibited area will draw the attention
of ground security forces and may
provide the ‘‘heads up’’ notice required
to take proper action to prevent or
lessen the severity of an attack. An
incursion into P–50 would not
automatically equate to hostile intent or
trigger a defensive response.
Several commenters stated that
general aviation (GA) aircraft are too
small to be a viable threat to the
submarines at the Kings Bay facility.
One commenter cited the January 2002
intentional crash by a suicidal pilot of
a small aircraft into a Tampa, FL, office
building as evidence that GA aircraft are
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
not capable of causing significant
damage to buildings or equipment.
FAA Response: The FAA does not
agree. Submarine characteristics and
design information is classified and,
therefore, cannot be discussed here.
However, the potential for serious
damage to the vessels does exist
whether it is the result of a direct
impact or collateral damage.
Numerous commenters, including the
Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association
(AOPA) and the General Aviation
Manufacturers Association (GAMA),
said that the FAA should consider
alternatives to a permanent prohibited
airspace designation. They cited a
number of actions taken by the Federal
government since September 11, 2001,
to enhance aviation security, including:
advanced screening of pilot data bases,
flight training restrictions and
background checks for foreign nationals
seeking flight training, and various
requirements pertaining to flight school
operations. In addition, AOPA’s
nationwide Airport Watch program was
initiated to improve the security of
airports and aircraft. AOPA called for
the FAA to issue an advisory for pilots,
similar to that contained in the current
Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) that advises
pilots to avoid flight near nuclear power
plants, instead of implementing the
prohibited area.
FAA Response: The FAA agrees that
the initiatives described above have
contributed to aviation system security.
However, these general initiatives do
not negate the need for specific
measures at the Kings Bay Naval Base.
Regarding the suggestion that the FAA
issue an advisory avoidance NOTAM
instead of establishing a prohibited area,
it should be noted that the ‘‘power
plant’’ NOTAM discussed above is a
voluntary measure and does not
prohibit aircraft overflight of a facility.
By prohibiting flight in the airspace
above the base, the Navy’s defense force
can more easily focus on the
identification of a potential threat and
react accordingly.
The majority of the commenters,
including AOPA, GAMA, and the St.
Marys Airport Authority, opposed the
prohibited area because it would
severely impact the operation of the
nearby St. Marys Airport (4J6), St.
Marys, GA. The airport has been
continuously impacted by various TFR
over the Kings Bay Naval Base since
September 13, 2001. The commenters
cited numerous adverse impacts on the
airport and community, including:
cancellation of the only instrument
E:\FR\FM\23DER1.SGM
23DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 246 (Friday, December 23, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 76140-76148]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-24433]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 71
[Docket No. FAA-2005-20700; Airspace Docket No. 04-AWA-8]
RIN 2120-AA66
Establishment of Class C Airspace and Revocation of Class D
Airspace, Orlando Sanford International Airport, FL; and Modification
of the Orlando International Airport Class B Airspace Area, FL
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action establishes Class C airspace at the Orlando
Sanford International Airport (SFB), FL; revokes the existing Sanford,
FL, Class D airspace area and its associated Class E airspace
extension; and modifies the existing Orlando International Airport
(MCO), FL, Class B airspace area. The FAA is taking this action to
improve the flow of air traffic, enhance safety, and reduce the
potential for midair collision in the Orlando, FL, terminal area.
EFFECTIVE DATE: 0901 UTC, February 16, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Gallant, Airspace and Rules,
Office of System Operations Airspace and AIM, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone: (202) 267-8783.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On August 8, 2005, the FAA published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking to modify the Orlando International
Airport, FL, Class B airspace area, establish the Orlando Sanford
International Airport Class C airspace, and revoke the existing Sanford
Airport Class D airspace (70 FR 45599). The FAA proposed to realign the
MCO Class B airspace area (within the existing lateral boundaries) due
to the commissioning of runway 17L/35R; to ensure that MCO arrivals and
departures are retained within Class B airspace; and adjust the
configuration of the Class B airspace area to accommodate the Orlando
Sanford International Airport Class C airspace area. The FAA proposed
to establish the SFB Class C airspace area to enhance safety and
improve the management of air traffic in the terminal area.
Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking
effort by submitting written comments on the proposal. In response to
the NPRM, the FAA received 20 written comments. Many of the commenters
identified themselves as pilots who operate
[[Page 76141]]
within, or through, the local area. All comments received were
considered before making a determination on the final rule. An analysis
of the comments received and the FAA's responses are contained in the
``Discussion of Comments'' section, below.
Discussion of Comments
Three commenters (a commercial carrier, a flight instructor, and a
local flying club) wrote in support of the proposed action. The
remaining commenters objected to various aspects of the proposal, with
most opposition directed at the proposed establishment of Class C
airspace at SFB.
One commenter felt that changes to the MCO Class B to accommodate
the proposed SFB Class C airspace might be unsafe. Concern was
expressed that modification of the east-west visual flight rules (VFR)
flyway between SFB and Orlando Executive Airport would compress traffic
due to the locations of VFR practice areas and the Bithlo television
towers.
FAA Response: The FAA does not agree. The modification of the MCO
Class B airspace area to accommodate the SFB Class C airspace will not
adversely impact operations to or from MCO. In addition, raising the
floor of Class B airspace from 1,600 feet MSL to 2,000 feet MSL around
Orlando Executive Airport will provide additional airspace for VFR
aircraft to utilize while remaining below the floor of the MCO Class B
airspace. The east-west flyway will be moved only one or two miles
south of its current location and will remain north of the Bithlo
towers and north of the Lake Apopka practice area. The modifications
will provide additional flyway and transition airspace for VFR aircraft
as compared to the present airspace configuration.
A number of commenters, including the Aircraft Owners and Pilots
Association (AOPA) cited the excellent safety record at SFB as evidence
that Class C airspace is not needed at that location.
FAA Response: The FAA agrees that SFB has had an excellent safety
record. However, during calendar year 2004, SFB experienced an increase
in runway incursions. During calendar year 2005, SFB undertook
proactive measures that successfully reduced the number of runway
incursions. Based on growing passenger enplanements, traffic mix, and
complexity, the FAA believes that the designation of Class C airspace
at SFB is a necessary step toward maintaining that record by further
improving safety and enhancing the management of air traffic operations
in the area. Receiving Class C radar services will improve safety for
aircraft operating at SFB and for VFR aircraft transitioning the area.
One commenter said the FAA should pursue nonregulatory alternatives
to Class C airspace at SFB such as: Adjust staffing to address safety
and controller workload concerns; modify the MCO Class B airspace area
or the existing SFB Class D airspace area to contain aircraft beyond
the four-mile final; and delegate the sequencing of SFB arrivals to MCO
approach control by letter of agreement rather than by establishing
additional regulatory airspace.
FAA Response: FAA policy requires that, prior to considering
designation of Class C airspace at a given location, nonregulatory
alternatives that would provide an acceptable level of safety must be
utilized such as: Improved radar services, pilot/controller education
programs, and safety seminars. As discussed in the NPRM, a number of
nonrulemaking actions were taken to address safety in the SFB area,
including: (1) The installation of Digital Bright Radar Tower Equipment
at SFB ATCT; (2) annual Operation Rain Check pilot-controller forums;
(3) periodic user group meetings and safety meetings; (4) procedural
initiatives to keep larger arriving aircraft at higher altitudes away
from slower traffic and rerouting of arrivals to avoid a flight
training area; (5) set up of standard VFR arrival areas; and (6)
development of various procedures for more efficient handling of flight
school operations in the Orlando area. These nonregulatory efforts
have, indeed, contributed to enhanced safety at SFB. However, traffic
conflicts in the SFB area remain a concern and the FAA believes that,
considering rising passenger enplanements, and the traffic mix and
volume in the Central Florida terminal area, additional action is
needed in the form of Class C airspace to maintain the excellent safety
record. The commenter's suggestion to adjust staffing as a means to
reduce SFB tower controller workload would not be feasible to resolve
the problem. A concern at SFB is the mix of small and large aircraft
that use runway 9L/27R and operate in the airspace along the SFB final
approach and departure areas. One controller works runway 9L/27R
traffic, and splitting the position responsibilities is not possible.
Therefore, additional staffing would not alleviate the workload
concerns. Another suggested alternative for reducing SFB Tower workload
was to delegate the sequencing of SFB arrivals to MCO approach control
by a letter of agreement rather than establishing Class C airspace.
However, such a procedure would not eliminate initial call-ups to the
Tower by VFR aircraft operating in the area. It was also suggested
that, instead of establishing Class C airspace at SFB, the FAA should
expand the MCO Class B or the SFB Class D airspace areas to address the
issue of SFB air carrier arrivals exiting Class B or D airspace prior
to the four-mile point on final approach. Expanding the MCO Class B
airspace area to cover this airspace would not be appropriate because
Class B airspace is not needed in that area to support MCO operations.
Additionally, expanding Class B airspace to encompass SFB final
approach operations would hamper VFR operations at SFB by placing
additional regulatory requirements on VFR pilots operating at SFB.
Class D airspace design criteria do not allow for the length of
extensions that would be required to contain the SFB ILS final approach
course. The FAA believes that enhanced traffic flow and increased
safety will be achieved through the designation of the SFB Class C
airspace area.
Several commenters questioned the adequacy of air traffic
controller staffing levels to handle the workload resulting from the
modification of the MCO Class B and designation of the SFB Class C
airspace.
FAA Response: Staffing and equipment resources are already in place
to support the MCO Class B modifications and the establishment of the
SFB Class C airspace. Procedures have been developed to operate SFB
with Class C airspace. Further, MCO TRACON has added an additional
sector and radio frequency, and requested an additional VFR code block,
in preparation for the expected additional volume to be generated by
the airspace changes. Class C airspace will generate an increased
workload for the SFB Clearance Delivery position, but that position is
prepared to handle the increase. Staffing and equipment levels are
adequate to provide all Class C services without impacting safety or
efficiency and the FAA does not expect staffing to be an issue for MCO
or SFB. However, should circumstances arise that indicate a need for
additional resources, action will be taken to obtain them.
One commenter questioned the justification for Class C airspace at
SFB based on the passenger enplanement count, stating the enplanement
data alone do not tell the full story, and two commenters questioned
the validity of Class C airspace at SFB because the SFB operations
count has declined below the criteria threshold.
[[Page 76142]]
FAA Response: The FAA agrees that enplanements are not the sole
factor in determining a need for Class C airspace. Instrument
operations and passenger enplanement data are used to identify an
airport as a possible candidate for Class C airspace. For an airport to
be identified as a candidate for Class C airspace, the airport must be
serviced by an operational airport traffic control tower and a radar
approach control. In addition, the airport must meet at least ONE of
the following: (1) An annual instrument operations count of 75,000 at
the primary airport; (2) an annual instrument operations count of
100,000 at the primary and secondary airports in the terminal area hub;
or (3) an annual count of 250,000 enplaned passengers at the primary
airport. These criteria only identify an airport as a candidate for
possible Class C airspace designation. Since the enplaned passenger
count for SFB exceeds 600,000, it is a legitimate candidate for Class C
airspace. A range of other factors must also be considered when
determining if a need for Class C airspace exists. However, a need to
enhance safety is the main consideration in evaluating these factors.
SFB ranks as the 24th busiest tower in the United States. SFB serves a
combination of large aircraft with high passenger counts mixed with
general aviation operations, and a high level of flight training
activities. The FAA believes that the SFB Class C airspace area is
justified to provide a safer environment for this mix of operations.
The Greater Orlando Airports Authority (GOAA) expressed concerns
about the impact on safety for pilots flying to Orlando Executive
Airport. The GOAA noted that Orlando Executive Airport, with Class D
airspace, will be located between two more restrictive types of
airspace; that is, Class B at MCO and Class C at SFB. The GOAA believes
that the FAA did not use a regional approach in studying the terminal
area airspace, and requested that the FAA implement Class C airspace at
Orlando Executive concurrent with the designation of Class C airspace
at SFB.
FAA Response: The FAA does not agree with GOAA's concerns regarding
the extent or validity of the airspace study. FAA directives list the
factors to be examined in the airspace staff study when considering
Class B and Class C airspace proposals. These include an examination of
VFR and IFR traffic flows into, out of, and through the terminal area;
air traffic at each satellite airport in the area; and a description of
overall air traffic operations in the overall area. Considering the
close proximity of Orlando Executive Airport, MCO, and SFB, operations
at each airport must be taken into account when examining the terminal
area. Due to the size of the area encompassed by the MCO Class B
airspace, a study of air traffic operations and airspace in that area
must necessarily include a regional perspective. In 2003, the FAA
completed a preliminary staff study to examine the need for Class C
airspace at Orlando Executive Airport. However, the instrument
operations count for the airport dropped below the 75,000 criteria, so
further action was not pursued. The FAA believes that implementation of
Class C airspace at Orlando Executive Airport at this time would be
overly restrictive to VFR operations at Orlando Executive Airport. It
should be noted that FAA policy directives call for terminal airspace
designations to be reviewed every two years; therefore, airspace
requirements at Orlando Executive Airport will be subject to further
review. The FAA does not believe that this rulemaking action will
adversely affect safety for pilots operating to or from Orlando
Executive Airport, nor should pilots experience delays as a result. A
similar situation exists in southern Florida and safety has not been
compromised.
One pilot wrote that the proposed SFB Class C airspace
configuration might be unsafe, citing the amount of restricted or
otherwise controlled airspace already in the area (R-2910, MCO Class B,
Daytona Beach Class C, etc.). The commenter objected to placing Class C
airspace around SFB that would extend farther north than the current
MCO Class B airspace boundary. This would crowd VFR aircraft into less
space, particularly to the northwest of the proposed outer ring where
two towers extend to over 1,700 feet MSL.
FAA Response: The commenter is incorrect regarding the extent of
the SFB 10-NM ring. The original configuration of the proposed SFB
Class C airspace did include a full 10-NM ring north of the airport.
However, based on feedback from the ad hoc committee meetings, and as
described in the NPRM, the proposed SFB Class C airspace design was
changed so that the 10-NM ring was eliminated north of the current
northern boundary of the MCO Class B airspace area along latitude
28[deg]53[min]00[sec] N. Therefore, Class C airspace will not extend
into the airspace in question near the towers nor will the SFB Class C
airspace result in additional crowding of VFR aircraft between the
Daytona Beach Class C airspace area and the current northern edge of
the MCO Class B airspace area. Similarly, to the south of SFB, the
Class C 10-NM ring was cutoff along latitude 28[deg]41[min]36[sec] N.
This modification provides additional airspace in the east-west VFR
flyway located between Orlando Executive and SFB.
A majority of the commenters stated that the SFB Class C airspace
would adversely impact, and place undue burdens on, VFR operations to,
from, and transiting the terminal area. Several writers commented that
they currently are able to operate to and from SFB without problems or
delays. Several commenters felt that the existing MCO Class B airspace
dominates the region and currently restricts VFR flying and that adding
the SFB Class C airspace would make flying in the area more confusing.
Commenters were also concerned that the implementation of Class C
airspace might cause congestion and bottlenecks on approach control
frequencies and otherwise result in limitations on general aviation
access to the airspace.
FAA Response: The FAA does not agree. Current traffic routings and
proposed Class C routings were compared and it was found that the new
Class C airspace would have minimal negative impact on users.
Procedures for the Class C airspace operation will allow SFB users to
continue flying much as they do today. The FAA believes that this rule
will provide an additional level of safety for VFR aircraft operating
at SFB and in the Orlando terminal area. A minimal increase in flying
miles (five miles further west or east of SFB) may be required for
pilots desiring to transit outside the SFB Class C and MCO Class B
airspace areas. With Class C airspace, all VFR aircraft flying to SFB
will receive radar service. ATC will utilize three arrival sectors for
handling inbound aircraft. This will result in less difficulty arriving
at SFB and may reduce flying time to enter the traffic pattern. The
modifications to the MCO Class B airspace will also provide additional
airspace for VFR aircraft in the area to the north of Orlando Executive
Airport and south of the SFB Class C airspace area. A new north-south
VFR flyway is being added to the east of the SFB Class C airspace area.
The FAA is also establishing two new VFR waypoints (VPAPO southwest of
SFB at lat. 28[deg]40[min]15[sec] N., long. 81[deg]31[min]31[sec] W.;
and VPBIT southeast of SFB at lat. 28[deg]39[min]54[sec] N., long.
81[deg]01[min]18[sec] W.). The new waypoints will assist VFR navigation
through the expanded east-west VFR flyway that lies between Orlando
Executive Airport and SFB, and the north-south flyways to the east and
west of the SFB Class C airspace area. The FAA will allow SFB VFR
[[Page 76143]]
departures, on pilot request, to remain on SFB ATCT frequency and
terminate service at the 5-mile Class C airspace ring. The FAA also
will continue the procedure whereby departing VFR aircraft at Orlando
Executive Airport may request a transponder code on the ground.
Currently, most Orlando Executive VFR northbound departures fly around
the SFB Class D airspace. The addition of the SFB Class C airspace will
only slightly increase flying miles as noted above. Since the changes
implemented by this rulemaking action lie totally within the existing
MCO mode C veil, no additional aircraft equipment requirements are
imposed in order to operate in the area. As discussed under the
comments regarding staffing, above, the FAA has taken steps to ensure
that MCO approach control is prepared to handle the workload generated
by the implementation of the SFB Class C airspace area.
A suggestion was made that the floor of the SFB Class C airspace in
the 5-10 mile ring be raised from 1,300 feet MSL to 1,600 feet MSL to
allow transiting VFR aircraft to fly beneath the area at 1,500 feet
MSL.
FAA Response: The FAA does not agree with the suggestion. The
crossing altitudes at the final approach fixes are 1,500 feet MSL and
1,600 feet MSL. Raising the floor as suggested would result in
conflicts that the Class C airspace is designed to eliminate.
One commenter suggested that a north-south VFR flyway be
established directly over SFB.
FAA Response: The FAA does not agree. Currently, aircraft
transitioning over SFB at 1,500 feet MSL, as approved by SFB Tower,
total only about five per day. With the implementation of the SFB Class
C airspace area, a transition over SFB at 2,500 feet MSL would be
possible for aircraft in contact with MCO approach control. A VFR
flyway directly over SFB would not be feasible. VFR flyways provide
general flight paths for pilots planning flights into, out of, through,
or near complex terminal airspace so as to avoid Class B airspace.
Flyway altitudes must avoid airspace that requires prior authorization
or clearance to enter. A flyway over SFB would result in departures
being restricted below the flyway altitude until clear of the flyway.
The airspace between 2,000 feet MSL and 3,000 feet MSL over SFB is used
to transition arrivals and departures to/from Orlando Executive
Airport. Due to the complexity of the airspace in the SFB area, the
suggested flyway is not feasible because it would impact SFB
operations, and/or require pilots to obtain a Class B clearance or
establish communications in order to enter Class C airspace.
Several commenters, including AOPA, argued that the FAA did not
follow the ad hoc committee process, ignored public input, and/or did
not obtain sufficient user involvement in developing this airspace
proposal.
FAA Response: Substantial user input was obtained in developing the
MCO/SFB airspace proposal. Ad hoc user meetings were held on January
14, February 25, and March 17, 2003. The FAA did encounter a delay in
mailing of the announcement of the two Informal Airspace Meetings held
in November 2003. As a result, supplemental notifications were made to
various organizations via e-mail and the information was displayed on
the MCO Tower web site. The NPRM also provided a 60-day comment period,
which resulted in 20 written comments being submitted to the FAA.
Additionally, discussions on the project have been included at regular
local airport user meetings since early 2003. The comment that the FAA
ignored public input is without basis. In fact, the NPRM specifically
addressed at least seven specific issues that were raised in a letter
submitted to the FAA by an aviation organization as a result of public
meetings. The NPRM also discussed a number of recommendations that
resulted from the ad hoc committee meetings and included issues
discussed at the November 2003 Informal Airspace Meetings.
The following is a summary of the ad hoc committee recommendations:
1. Reduce the Class C 10-mile ring north of SFB to align with the
current Class B boundary.
2. Include a cutout from the Class C airspace area to accommodate
the Cedar Knoll Flying Ranch Airport.
3. Provide a procedure allowing SFB VFR departures to remain with
the Tower and terminate services at the five-mile ring, below the Class
C airspace outer area.
4. Permit Orlando Executive Airport VFR departures to obtain a
transponder code on the ground.
5. Establish an uncontrolled VFR flyway over SFB at 2,500 feet MSL
and a new flyway east of the proposed SFB Class C airspace.
6. Realign the eastern edge of the proposed Class C airspace to
follow the shore of Lake Harney.
7. Raise the floor of the proposed SFB Class C from 1,300 feet MSL
to 1,600 feet MSL within the 5-10 mile ring to enable VFR aircraft to
fly beneath it at 1,500 feet MSL.
8. Establish Class C airspace at Orlando Executive Airport
concurrent with the SFB Class C airspace implementation.
With the exception of the VFR flyway over SFB, the alignment of the
Class C boundary along Lake Harney, the requested 1,600 feet MSL floor
in the 5-10 mile ring, and the designation of Class C airspace at
Orlando Executive Airport, the above recommendations were adopted.
The Rule
This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Aviation Regulations
(14 CFR) part 71 to modify the MCO Class B airspace area, establish the
SFB Class C airspace area, and revoke the SFB Class D airspace area.
The specifics of this action (depicted on the attached chart) are
summarized in the following paragraphs. In addition, this rule revokes
the Class E airspace extension to the SFB Class D airspace area.
Orlando Sanford International Airport Class C Airspace
The Sanford Class C airspace area is described as follows:
That airspace extending upward from the surface to but not
including 3,000 feet MSL within a 5-mile radius of the Sanford
International Airport (SFB), excluding that airspace from the surface
to but not including 700 feet MSL in the vicinity of Cedar Knoll Flying
Ranch Airport within the area beginning at lat. 28[deg]50'00'' N.,
long. 81[deg]10'00'' W., thence clockwise along the SFB 5-mile radius
arc to lat. 28[deg]43'20'' N., long. 81[deg]10'00'' W., thence north to
the point of beginning; and that airspace extending upward from 1,300
feet MSL to but not including 3,000 feet MSL within the area beginning
northeast of the primary airport at the intersection of the SFB 10-mile
radius arc and lat. 28[deg]53'00'' N., thence clockwise along the SFB
10-mile radius arc to lat. 28[deg]41'36'' N., then west along lat.
28[deg]41'36'' N. to the intersection of the SFB 10-mile radius arc,
then clockwise along the SFB 10-mile radius arc to lat. 28[deg]53'00''
N., then east along lat. 28[deg]53'00'' N., to the point of beginning.
The SFB Class C airspace area will be effective during times when
the Orlando Sanford International ATCT is in operation. These times
will be published in the appropriate volume of the Airport/Facility
Directory.
The Sanford Class C airspace will replace the existing Sanford
Class D airspace area, which will be revoked through this rule. In
addition, although not addressed in the NPRM, this action also revokes
the existing Class E airspace extension to the SFB Class D
[[Page 76144]]
airspace area. Since the Class D airspace area is being revoked, the
Class E extension is no longer required.
Orlando International Airport Class B Airspace
This action modifies several areas within the Orlando Class B
airspace to accommodate the new Sanford Class C airspace area; reflect
the adjustment of the Orlando International Airport ARP as a result of
the commissioning of the fourth runway at Orlando International
Airport; and provide additional Class B airspace to ensure that Orlando
International Airport arrivals and departures are contained within
Class B airspace. The existing outer-most boundaries of the Orlando
Class B airspace area remain unchanged by these modifications.
The following describes the revisions to the Orlando Class B
airspace area:
Area A. Area A is recentered on lat. 28[deg]25'46'' N., long.
81[deg]18'32'' W. This represents a shift of Area A slightly to the
east to recenter the area on the revised Orlando International Airport
ARP, which was adjusted due to the addition of the fourth runway at
Orlando International.
Area B. The eastern boundary of Area B is shifted approximately 1
NM east to long. 81[deg]10'00'' W. to accommodate the new Orlando
International Airport runway.
Area C. The section of Area C in the vicinity of Sanford
International Airport is removed and replaced by the Sanford Class C
airspace area up to but not including 3,000 feet MSL, and by Area E
from 3,000 feet MSL up to and including 10,000 feet MSL. Area C in the
vicinity of Orlando Executive Airport is reduced in size. The airspace
removed from Area C to the west, north, and northeast of Orlando
Executive Airport is incorporated into Area D with its higher Class B
airspace floor of 2,000 feet MSL. This change increases the amount of
airspace available to VFR aircraft allowing them to utilize that area
below 2,000 feet and remain outside of Class B airspace. Also, the
eastern boundary of the Area C segments located to the north and south
of Orlando International Airport is modified by moving the eastern
boundary one degree east to long. 81[deg]10'00'' W. to accommodate the
new runway.
Area D. Area D is expanded in size in the vicinity of Orlando
Executive Airport by incorporating the airspace removed from Area C, as
described above. This change also raises the floor of Class B airspace
in the affected area from 1,600 feet MSL to 2,000 feet MSL, providing
additional VFR flyway airspace between Sanford International Airport
and Orlando Executive Airport while still protecting Orlando
International Airport arrivals. Also, the eastern boundary of Area D is
moved eastward to long. 81[deg]10'00'' W. to accommodate the new runway
at Orlando International Airport.
Area E. The boundary of Area E to the east of Orlando
International, currently defined by long. 81[deg]11'00'' W., is moved
eastward one degree to long. 81[deg]10'00'' W. This modification
accommodates the new Orlando International Airport runway.
Additionally, Area E is expanded in the vicinity of Sanford so that
Area E overlies the Sanford Class C airspace area and incorporates the
airspace from 3,000 feet MSL up to and including 10,000 feet MSL over
Sanford, that was formerly in Area C. Also, the southern boundary of
Area E, located to the south of Sanford, is moved further south by
approximately 2.5 NM to align it with the southern boundary of the
Sanford Class C airspace area, along lat. 28[deg]41'36'' N.
Area F. That airspace described as Area F in the existing Orlando
Class B airspace area is renamed ``Area G.'' A new Area F is inserted
to the west of Orlando International, adjacent to, and west of, Area D
and Area E. This new Area F consists of that airspace located between
long, 81[deg]27'30'' W. and long. 81[deg]32'00'' W., and bounded by the
ORL VORTAC 30-mile radius on the south, and by lat. 28[deg]53'00'' N.,
on the north. The floor of the new Area F is set at 4,000 feet MSL
instead of the 6,000 feet MSL floor in the existing Area F. The lower
floor provided by the new Area F ensures that departures climbing
westbound off MCO and arrivals on downwind leg for landing at Orlando
International remain within Class B airspace.
Area G. The remaining sections of the existing Area F are renamed
Area G as a result of the addition of a new Area F, described above.
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
final rule: (1) Will generate benefits that justify its minimal 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) will not have
a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities; (4)
will not constitute a barrier to international trade; and (5) will 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.
The FAA proposed to change the Orlando Class B and the Orlando
Sanford Airport Class D airspace areas. The Orlando Class B airspace
area modification will maintain the 10,000 feet MSL airspace ceiling
and redefine the lateral limits of several of the existing subareas to
improve the management of air traffic operations in the Orlando
terminal area. The Orlando Sanford Airport Class D airspace area
upgrade to a Class C airspace area will lower the airspace area from
3,000 to 1,600 feet MSL and will include a radius of 4.4 NM from the
Orlando Sanford Airport up to but not including 1,600 feet MSL.
The FAA has determined that the changes to the Orlando Class B and
the Orlando Sanford Airport Class D airspace areas will improve the
operational efficiency while maintaining aviation safety in the
terminal airspace area. Also, clearer boundary definition and changes
to lateral and vertical limits of some subareas will provide additional
airspace for use by VFR aircraft transitioning to and from satellite
airports. This proposal will impose only negligible costs on some
airspace users but could potentially reduce circumnavigation costs to
other airspace users.
The final rule will result in negligible additional administrative
costs to the FAA and no additional operational costs for personnel or
equipment to the agency. Printing of aeronautical charts which reflect
the changes to the Class B area and the upgrade to Class C airspace
area will be accomplished during a scheduled chart printing, and will
result in no additional costs for plate modification and updating of
charts. Furthermore, no staffing changes will be required to maintain
the modified Class B airspace area and the upgraded Class D airspace
area. Potential increase in FAA operations workload could be absorbed
by current personnel and equipment.
[[Page 76145]]
In view of the negligible cost of compliance, enhanced aviation
safety, and improved operational efficiency, the FAA has determined
that the final rule will 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 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 (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 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.
The FAA has determined that the final rule will have a de minimus
impact on small entities. All commercial and general aviation operators
who presently use the Orlando International Airport are equipped to
operate within the modified Class B airspace area. As for aircraft that
regularly fly through the Orlando Sanford International Airport Class D
airspace area, since the airport is situated within the established
Orlando Mode C Veil, all aircraft should already have the necessary
equipment to transition the modified Class B airspace area. Therefore,
there will be no additional equipment cost to these entities.
Accordingly, pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C.
605(b), as the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration, I
certify that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
International Trade Impact Assessment
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 (proposed/final) rule and determined that it
will have only a domestic impact and therefore no affect on any trade-
sensitive activity.
Unfunded Mandates Assementment
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.'' The FAA currently
uses an inflation-adjusted value of $120.7 million in lieu of $100
million.
This final rule does not contain such a mandate. The requirements
of Title II 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 action.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71
Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).
The Amendment
0
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration
amends 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 7400.9N, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated September 1, 2005, and effective September 15,
2005, is amended as follows:
Paragraph 3000 Class B Airspace
* * * * *
ASO FL B Orlando, FL [Revised]
Orlando International Airport (MCO) (Primary Airport)
(Lat. 28[deg]25'46'' N., long. 81[deg]18'32'' W.)
Orlando VORTAC (ORL)
(Lat. 28[deg]32'34'' N., long. 81[deg]20'06'' W.)
Boundaries
Area A--That airspace extending upward from the surface to and
including 10,000 feet MSL within a 5-NM radius from the Orlando
International Airport.
Area B--That airspace extending upward from 900 feet MSL to and
including 10,000 feet MSL beginning at a point of the intersection
of State Road (S.R.) 423 (John Young Parkway SW of ORL VORTAC) and
Interstate 4, thence northeast along Interstate 4 to the
intersection of Interstate 4 and S.R. 441 (Orange Blossom Trail),
thence direct to the intersection of Lake Underhill Road and Palmer
Street, thence east along Lake Underhill Road to the intersection of
Lake Underhill Road and the Central Florida Greenway (S.R. 417),
thence direct to lat. 28[deg]29'22'' N., long. 81[deg]10'00'' W.
(the Stanton Power Plant), thence south to the intersection of the
ORL VORTAC 14-mile radius arc, thence clockwise along the ORL VORTAC
14-mile radius arc to the intersection of S.R. 423, thence north
along S.R. 423 to the point of beginning.
Area C--That airspace extending upward from 1,600 feet MSL to
and including 10,000 feet MSL beginning at a point of the
intersection of Interstate 4 and the Orlando Executive Airport Class
D airspace 4.2-mile radius arc (lat. 28[deg]30'33'' N., long.
81[deg]24'03'' W.), thence clockwise on the Orlando Executive
Airport 4.2-mile radius to University Blvd., thence east on
University Blvd. to the intersection of S.R. 434, thence east on
lat. 28[deg]35'50'' N. to long. 81[deg]10'00'' W., thence south to
lat. 28[deg]29'22'' N., thence northwest direct to the intersection
of Lake Underhill Road and Central Florida Greenway (S.R. 417),
thence west along Lake Underhill Road to the intersection of Palmer
Street, thence southwest to the point of beginning. Also, that
airspace south of the primary airport extending upward from 1,600
feet MSL to and including 10,000 feet MSL beginning at the point of
intersection of long. 81[deg]24'06'' W., and the ORL VORTAC 14-mile
radius arc, thence counterclockwise along the ORL VORTAC 14-mile
radius arc to the intersection of long. 81[deg]10'00'' W., thence
south to the intersection of the ORL VORTAC 20-mile radius arc,
thence clockwise along the ORL VORTAC 20-mile radius arc to long.
[[Page 76146]]
81[deg]24'06'' W., thence north to the point of beginning.
Area D--That airspace extending upward from 2,000 feet MSL to
and including 10,000 feet MSL beginning at a point of the
intersection of Interstate 4 and long. 81[deg]27'30'' W., thence
north to lat. 28[deg]41'36'' N., thence east to long. 81[deg]10'00''
W., thence south to lat. 28[deg]35'50'' N., thence west to the
intersection of S.R. 434 and University Blvd., thence west on
University Blvd. to the Orlando Executive Airport 4.2-mile radius
arc, thence counterclockwise on the Orlando Executive Airport 4.2-
mile radius arc to the intersection of Interstate 4, southwest of
the ORL VORTAC, thence west on Interstate 4 to the intersection of
S.R. 423, thence south along S.R. 423 to the intersection of the ORL
VORTAC 14-mile radius arc, thence counterclockwise along the ORL
VORTAC 14-mile radius arc to long. 81[deg]24'06'' W., thence south
to the intersection of the ORL VORTAC 20-mile radius arc, thence
clockwise along the ORL VORTAC 20-mile radius arc to the
intersection of long. 81[deg]27'30'' W., thence north to the point
of beginning.
Area E--That airspace extending upward from 3,000 feet MSL to
and including 10,000 feet MSL beginning at a point of the
intersection of lat. 28[deg]41'36'' N., long. 81[deg]27'30'' W.,
thence north to the intersection of lat. 28[deg]53'00'' N., thence
east to the intersection of the MCO Mode C Veil 30-NM radius arc,
thence southeast along the MCO Mode C Veil 30-NM radius arc to the
intersection of the power lines at lat. 28[deg]50'20'' N., thence
southeast along these power lines to lat. 28[deg]41'36'' N., thence
west to long. 81[deg]05'09'' W., thence south along the Florida
Power transmission lines to the intersection of Highway 50 at lat.
28[deg]32'10'' N., long. 81[deg]03'35'' W., thence south to the Bee
Line Expressway at lat. 28[deg]27'05'' N., long. 81[deg]03'45'' W.,
thence west along the Bee Line Expressway to the intersection of
lat. 28[deg]27'00'' N., long. 81[deg]04'40'' W., thence south to the
intersection of the ORL VORTAC 30-mile radius arc, thence clockwise
along the ORL VORTAC 30-mile radius arc to long. 81[deg]27'30'' W.,
thence north on long. 81[deg]27'30'' W., to the intersection of the
ORL VORTAC 20-mile radius arc, thence counterclockwise along the ORL
VORTAC 20-mile radius arc to the intersection of long.
81[deg]10'00'' W., thence north to the intersection of lat.
28[deg]41'36'' N., thence west to the point of beginning.
Area F--That airspace extending upward from 4,000 feet MSL to
and including 10,000 feet MSL beginning south of the primary airport
at the intersection of the ORL VORTAC 30-mile radius arc and long.
81[deg]27'30'' W., thence clockwise along the ORL VORTAC 30-mile
radius arc to long. 81[deg]32'00'' W., thence north to lat.
28[deg]53'00'' N., thence east to long. 81[deg]27'30'' W., thence
south to the point of beginning.
Area G--That airspace extending upward from 6,000 feet MSL to
and including 10,000 feet MSL beginning south of the primary airport
at the intersection of the ORL VORTAC 30-mile radius arc and long.
81[deg]32'00'' W., thence clockwise on the ORL VORTAC 30-mile radius
arc to the intersection of Highway 27, thence north along Highway 27
to the intersection of Highway 27 and long. 81[deg]45'00'' W.,
thence north along long. 81[deg]45'00'' W., to the intersection of
the ORL VORTAC 24-mile radius arc, thence clockwise along the ORL
VORTAC 24-mile radius arc to the intersection of lat. 28[deg]53'00''
N., thence east to the intersection of long. 81[deg]32'00'' W.,
thence south to the point of beginning. Also that airspace extending
upward from 6,000 feet MSL to and including 10,000 feet MSL
beginning at the Florida Power transmission lines at lat.
28[deg]41'36'' N., long. 81[deg]05'09'' W., thence east along lat.
28[deg]41'36'' N. to the Florida Power transmission lines at lat.
28[deg]41'36'' N., long. 80[deg]54'26'' W., thence southeast and
south along these power lines to the intersection of Highway 50,
thence south to the power lines at lat. 28[deg]22'14'' N., long.
80[deg]52'30'' W., thence southwest along these power lines to the
intersection of long. 81[deg]04'40'' W., thence north along long.
81[deg]04'40'' W., to the intersection of the Bee Line Expressway at
lat. 28[deg]27'00'' N., long. 81[deg]04'40'' W., thence east along
the Bee Line Expressway to lat. 28[deg]27'05'' N., long.
81[deg]03'45'' W., thence north to the intersection of Highway 50
and the Florida Power transmission lines at lat. 28[deg]32'10'' N.,
long. 81[deg]03'45'' W., thence north along these power lines to the
point of beginning.
* * * * *
Paragraph 4000 Class C Airspace
* * * * *
ASO FL C Sanford, FL [New]
Orlando Sanford International Airport (SFB) (Primary Airport)
(Lat. 28[deg]46'40'' N., long. 81[deg]14'15'' W.)
Cedar Knoll Flying Ranch Airport (Private Airport)
(Lat. 28[deg]46'55'' N., long. 81[deg]09'33'' W.)
That airspace extending upward from the surface to but not
including 3,000 feet MSL within a 5-mile radius of the Orlando
Sanford International Airport, excluding that airspace, from the
surface to but not including 700 feet MSL in the vicinity of Cedar
Knoll Flying Ranch Airport, within the area beginning at lat.
28[deg]50'00'' N., long. 81[deg]10'00'' W., thence clockwise along
the SFB 5-mile radius arc to lat. 28[deg]43'20'' N., long.
81[deg]10'00'' W., thence north to the point of beginning; and that
airspace extending upward from 1,300 feet MSL to but not including
3,000 feet MSL within the area beginning northeast of the primary
airport at the intersection of the SFB 10-mile radius arc and lat.
28[deg]53'00'' N., thence clockwise along the SFB 10-mile radius arc
to lat 28[deg]41'36'' N., thence westbound to the intersection of
the SFB 10-mile radius arc, thence clockwise on the SFB 10-mile
radius arc to lat. 28[deg]53'00'' N., thence east to the point of
beginning. This Class C airspace area is effective during the
specific days and hours of operation of the Orlando Sanford
International Airport Tower as established in advance by Notice to
Airmen. The effective dates and times will thereafter be
continuously published in the Airport/Facility Directory.
* * * * *
Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace
* * * * *
ASO FL D Sanford, FL [Remove]
* * * * *
Paragraph 6004 Class E Airspace Areas Designated as an Extension to
a Class D Surface Area
* * * * *
ASO FL E4 Sanford, FL [Remove]
* * * * *
Issued in Washington, DC, on December 20, 2005.
Edith V. Parish,
Manager, Airspace and Rules.
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U
[[Page 76147]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR23DE05.000
[FR Doc. 05-24433 Filed 12-22-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-C