Establishment of Class E Airspace; Pampa, TX, 55722-55723 [E8-22719]
Download as PDF
55722
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 188 / Friday, September 26, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
(g) Not later than December 31, 2008,
each Bank shall declare the results of its
election and report the results, pursuant
to § 1261.7(f) and (g).
(h) For any Bank that began a 2008
elective directorship election process
after having received the Federal
Housing Finance Board’s Resolution
titled 2008 Designation of Federal Home
Loan Bank Directorships, Resolution
No. 2008–10 dated May 14, 2008, if the
number of elective directorships
designated for election in 2008 in that
Resolution for any state is the same as,
or is more than, the number of member
directorships designated for election in
the state in 2008 in the Order of the
FHFA Director dated September 8, 2008,
then, as to such states to the extent that
the Bank has completed the election
process for such directorships in
accordance with Federal Housing
Finance Board rules up through and
including verification of eligibility of
nominees, the Bank’s election process
for member directorships shall be
deemed to be in compliance with
paragraphs (a), (b), (c) and (d) of this
section, as applicable.
(i) This section is effective from
September 26, 2008 through December
31, 2008.
Background
Dated: September 22, 2008.
James B. Lockhart, III,
Director, Federal Housing Finance Agency.
[FR Doc. E8–22659 Filed 9–25–08; 8:45 am]
Justification for Immediate Adoption
BILLING CODE 8070–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
On January 3, 2005, FAA published a
final rule revising the regulations
concerning registering aircraft and
recording security documents (70 FR
245). These revisions were required by
the Cape Town Treaty Implementation
Act of 2004. The Cape Town Treaty
established a new International Registry
for registering interests against certain
aircraft and aircraft engines. The rule
also made unrelated technical changes
to other portions of the regulations.
One of the technical changes affected
14 CFR 47.35. The amendment should
have revised paragraph (a) introductory
text, in order to revise an outdated
reference to an Act. However, the entire
paragraph (a) was inadvertently revised,
which resulted in the loss of paragraphs
(a)(1) and (a)(2). The information in
paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) was still
necessary and should have remained in
the section.
This technical amendment merely
reinstates paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) to
14 CFR 47.35. The text of these
paragraphs remains as it was at the time
of their inadvertent removal.
Because this action reinstates
paragraphs that were never intended to
be removed, the FAA finds that notice
and public comment under 5 U.S.C.
553(b) is unnecessary. For the same
reason, the FAA finds that good cause
exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(d) for making
this rule effective upon publication.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 47
14 CFR Part 47
Aircraft, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
The Amendment
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule; technical
amendment.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
AGENCY:
In consideration of the foregoing, the
Federal Aviation Administration
amends Chapter I of Title 14, Code of
Federal Regulations, part 47, as follows:
■
SUMMARY: This final rule corrects a
previously published rule. In the
original document, an amendment
inadvertently removed two paragraphs
relating to the registration of certain
aircraft. This rule reinstates those two
paragraphs in their original form.
DATES: This rule is effective September
26, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Walter Binkley, Civil Aviation Registry,
AFS–750, Mike Monroney Aeronautical
Center, 6500 South MacArthur
Boulevard, Oklahoma City, OK 73169;
Telephone (405) 954–3131.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:25 Sep 25, 2008
Jkt 214001
PART 47–AIRCRAFT REGISTRATION
1. The authority citation for part 47
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 4 U.S.T. 1830; Pub. L. 108–297,
118 Stat. 1095 (49 U.S.C. 40101 note, 49
U.S.C. 44101 note); 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113–
40114, 44101–44108, 44110–44113, 44703–
44704, 44713, 45302, 46104, 46301.
2. Amend § 47.35 by adding
paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) to read as
follows:
■
§ 47.35 Aircraft last previously registered
in the United States.
(a) * * *
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Issued in Washington, DC, on September
22, 2008.
Pamela Hamilton-Powell,
Director, Office of Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. E8–22586 Filed 9–25–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 71
Technical Amendment
Federal Aviation Administration
Cape Town Treaty Implementation
(1) If the applicant bought the aircraft
from the last registered owner, the
conveyance must be from that owner to
the applicant.
(2) If the applicant did not buy the
aircraft from the last registered owner,
he must submit conveyances or other
instruments showing consecutive
transactions from the last registered
owner through each intervening owner
to the applicant.
*
*
*
*
*
[Docket No. FAA–2008–0610; Airspace
Docket No. 08–ASW–10]
Establishment of Class E Airspace;
Pampa, TX
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Direct final rule; confirmation of
effective date; correction.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This action confirms the
effective date and makes a correction to
the direct final rule that establishes
Class E airspace at Pampa, Mesa Vista
Ranch Airport, TX, published in the
Federal Register July 7, 2008 (73 FR
38314) Docket No. FAA–2008–0610.
This action corrects the final rule by
adding ‘‘Mesa Vista Ranch Airport’’ to
more clearly define the airport name in
the airport description.
DATES: Effective Date: 0901 UTC
September 25, 2008. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this
incorporation by reference action under
Title 1, Code of Federal Regulations,
part 51, subject to the annual revision of
FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of
conforming amendments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary
Mallett, Central Service Center, System
Support Group, Federal Aviation
Administration, Southwest Region, 2601
Meacham Blvd, Fort Worth, TX, 76193–
0530; telephone (817) 222–4949.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
History
The FAA published a direct final rule
with request for comments in the
Federal Register July 7, 2008, (73 FR
38314), Docket No. FAA–2008–0610.
E:\FR\FM\26SER1.SGM
26SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 188 / Friday, September 26, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
The FAA uses the direct final rule
procedure for non-controversial rules
where the FAA believes that there will
be no adverse public comment. This
direct final rule advised the public that
no adverse comments were anticipated,
and that unless a written adverse
comment, or a written notice of intent
to submit an adverse comment, was
received within the comment period,
the regulation would become effective
on September 25, 2008. No adverse
comments were received; thus, this
notice confirms that the direct final rule
will become effective on this date. Also,
the charting office recommended
changing the airport description to
include Mesa Vista Ranch Airport.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113,
40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959–
1963 Comp., p. 389.
Correction
■ In the Federal Register dated July 7,
2008, Federal Register Docket No.
FAA–2008–0610, page 38315, column 3,
line 50, change to read:
ASW TX Class E5 Pampa, Mesa Vista
Ranch Airport, TX [New].
*
*
*
*
*
Issued in Fort Worth, TX on September 17,
2008.
Roger Trevino,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group,
ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. E8–22719 Filed 9–25–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
areas (MOA) contained in the
Adirondack Airspace Complex. Unlike
restricted areas, which are designated
under 14 CFR part 73, MOAs are not
rulemaking airspace actions. However,
since these MOAs form an integral part
of the Adirondack Airspace Complex,
the FAA is including a description of
the associated MOA changes in this
rule. The MOA changes described here
will also be published in the National
Flight Data Digest (NFDD). The ANG
requested these airspace changes to
provide the additional SUA needed to
conduct more realistic aircrew training
in the Adirondack Airspace Complex.
DATES: Effective Date: 0901 UTC,
November 20, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul
Gallant, Airspace and Rules Group,
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 June 6, 2007, the FAA published
in the Federal Register a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to
redesign the SUA in the vicinity of Fort
Drum, NY (72 FR 31211). Interested
parties were invited to participate in
this rulemaking proceeding by
submitting written comments on the
proposal to the FAA. Seven responses
were received.
Discussion of Comments
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 73
[Docket No. FAA–2006–26192; Airspace
Docket No. 06–ASO–11]
RIN 2120–AA66
Modification and Establishment of
Restricted Areas and Other Special
Use Airspace, Adirondack Airspace
Complex; Fort Drum, NY
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This action restructures the
restricted areas and other special use
airspace (SUA) located in the vicinity of
Fort Drum, NY. The Air National Guard
(ANG) requested redesign of existing
restricted airspace R–5201, known as
the Adirondack Airspace Complex, by
establishing two new restricted areas:
R–5202A and R–5202B, and by
restructuring the military operations
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:40 Sep 25, 2008
Jkt 214001
The Aircraft Owners and Pilots
Association (AOPA) opposed the
proposed Adirondack Airspace
Complex modifications for several
reasons. AOPA questioned the need for
two nearly identical SUA expansions
being developed within 150 nautical
miles (NM) of one another (i.e.,
Adirondack Airspace Complex, NY and
Condor MOA, ME). AOPA contended
that expanding both Adirondack and
Condor would result in redundant SUA
and would not be efficient use of the
National Airspace System (NAS).
FAA Response: Many factors are
considered in the development of SUA
proposals including, but not limited to,
distance of the proposed SUA from the
user’s base, number of users to be
accommodated and training capacity of
the area. Ideally, MOAs should be
located within 100 NM of the users’
home base. However, this is often not
possible due to other requirements of
the NAS. The greater the distance from
the launch base to the SUA, the more
transit time is required, which results in
less training time available per sortie
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
55723
and increased training costs per sortie.
The main distinction between the
Adirondack and Condor SUA is the
existence of restricted airspace at Fort
Drum, NY. No restricted airspace is
available at Condor; therefore, no
hazardous activities may be conducted
in that airspace. Use of the Condor
airspace is limited to air-to-air tactics
training, basic flight maneuvers, etc.
The Adirondack Airspace Complex is
used by as many as eight fighter wings
for training in air-to-air tactics, and airto-ground weapons delivery, lasers, etc.
In addition, Fort Drum is the home of
the U.S. Army’s 10th Mountain Division
and the restricted areas are extensively
used for surface-based weapons training
(e.g., artillery and mortar firing,
missiles, etc.) by U.S. Army and
National Guard units. The 174th FW at
Syracuse, NY, is both the proponent and
one of the primary users of the
Adirondack Airspace Complex. The
distance from Syracuse to Adirondack is
about 72 NM and about 274 NM from
Syracuse to the Condor airspace. While
the 174th FW could conceivably use
Condor for its air-to-air training, that
would add some 400 NM travel
distance—about one hour flying time—
to the sortie and severely limit available
training time. In addition, some training
profiles combine both air-to-air and airto-ground events in the same sortie
making it more efficient to conduct the
entire sortie in the Adirondack airspace.
At this time, the Condor MOA proposal
is still under study and it must be
analyzed and evaluated on its own
merit.
Additionally, AOPA stated its
opposition to use of the ‘‘Dynamic
Airspace concept’’ for airspace
management as it has yet to be
developed and defined.
FAA Response: The ‘‘Dynamic
Airspace concept’’ was not addressed in
the NPRM and is not an FAArecognized term. The NPRM did
indicate that one feature of the proposed
airspace changes was to enable more
efficient real-time use of the airspace. It
is FAA policy that all SUA areas be
activated on a real-time use basis to the
extent possible. This means that only
those SUA areas, or portions of areas,
that are actually needed for the mission
are activated, and users are expected to
return the airspace to the controlling
agency when not needed for the
mission. Real-time use provisions are
normally specified in a letter of
agreement to allow the controlling
agency to place temporary restrictions
or altitude limitations on the use of the
SUA, if required, so that
nonparticipating aircraft can transit the
SUA area. These provisions would be
E:\FR\FM\26SER1.SGM
26SER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 188 (Friday, September 26, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 55722-55723]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-22719]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 71
[Docket No. FAA-2008-0610; Airspace Docket No. 08-ASW-10]
Establishment of Class E Airspace; Pampa, TX
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Direct final rule; confirmation of effective date; correction.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action confirms the effective date and makes a correction
to the direct final rule that establishes Class E airspace at Pampa,
Mesa Vista Ranch Airport, TX, published in the Federal Register July 7,
2008 (73 FR 38314) Docket No. FAA-2008-0610. This action corrects the
final rule by adding ``Mesa Vista Ranch Airport'' to more clearly
define the airport name in the airport description.
DATES: Effective Date: 0901 UTC September 25, 2008. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
Title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual
revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary Mallett, Central Service Center,
System Support Group, Federal Aviation Administration, Southwest
Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd, Fort Worth, TX, 76193-0530; telephone (817)
222-4949.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
History
The FAA published a direct final rule with request for comments in
the Federal Register July 7, 2008, (73 FR 38314), Docket No. FAA-2008-
0610.
[[Page 55723]]
The FAA uses the direct final rule procedure for non-controversial
rules where the FAA believes that there will be no adverse public
comment. This direct final rule advised the public that no adverse
comments were anticipated, and that unless a written adverse comment,
or a written notice of intent to submit an adverse comment, was
received within the comment period, the regulation would become
effective on September 25, 2008. No adverse comments were received;
thus, this notice confirms that the direct final rule will become
effective on this date. Also, the charting office recommended changing
the airport description to include Mesa Vista Ranch Airport.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24
FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.
Correction
0
In the Federal Register dated July 7, 2008, Federal Register Docket No.
FAA-2008-0610, page 38315, column 3, line 50, change to read:
ASW TX Class E5 Pampa, Mesa Vista Ranch Airport, TX [New].
* * * * *
Issued in Fort Worth, TX on September 17, 2008.
Roger Trevino,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. E8-22719 Filed 9-25-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P