Proposed Amendment of Class C Airspace and Revocation of Class E Airspace Extension; Fort Lauderdale, FL, 17333-17342 [2021-06805]

Agencies

• Federal Aviation Administration
• DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 62 (Friday, April 2, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 17333-17342]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-06805]



[[Page 17333]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0988; Airspace Docket No. 18-AWA-3]


Proposed Amendment of Class C Airspace and Revocation of Class E 
Airspace Extension; Fort Lauderdale, FL

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to reconfigure and expand the Fort 
Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport, FL (FLL), Class C airspace 
area. The FAA is proposing this action to reduce the risk of midair 
collisions and enhance the efficient management of air traffic 
operations in the FLL terminal area. Additionally, this action proposes 
to revoke the Class E airspace extension to the FLL Class C airspace 
surface area. This proposed action is separate and distinct from the 
South Florida Metroplex Project. No flight path changes are associated 
with this proposal.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 1, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of 
Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West 
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590; telephone: 
(800) 647-5527, or (202) 366-9826. You must identify FAA Docket No. 
FAA-2020-0988; Airspace Docket No. 18-AWA-3, at the beginning of your 
comments. You may also submit comments through the internet at https://www.regulations.gov.
    FAA Order 7400.11E, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and 
subsequent amendments can be viewed online at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the 
Rules and Regulations Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National 
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the 
availability of FAA Order 7400.11E at NARA, email: 
[email protected] or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Gallant, Rules and Regulations 
Group, Office of Policy, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is 
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, 
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's 
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described 
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, 
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of 
the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the 
efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that 
authority as it would modify the airspace structure as necessary to 
preserve the safe and efficient flow of air traffic within the National 
Airspace System (NAS).

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed 
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they 
may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the 
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing 
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are 
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, 
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
    Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No. 
FAA-2020-0988; Airspace Docket No. 18-AWA-3) and be submitted in 
triplicate to the Docket Management Facility (see ADDRESSES section for 
address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the 
internet at https://www.regulations.gov.
    Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments 
on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed, 
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments 
to FAA Docket No. FAA-2020-0988; Airspace Docket No. 18-AWA-3.'' The 
postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received on or before the specified comment 
closing date will be considered before taking action on the proposed 
rule. The proposal contained in this action may be changed in light of 
comments received. All comments submitted will be available for 
examination in the public docket both before and after the comment 
closing date. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with 
FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the 
docket.

Availability of NPRM

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the 
internet at https://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking 
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's web page at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any 
comments received and any final disposition in person in the Dockets 
Office (see ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between 
9:00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal 
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal 
business hours at the office of the Eastern Service Center, Federal 
Aviation Administration, Room 210, 1701 Columbia Ave., College Park, GA 
30337.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document proposes to amend FAA Order 7400.11E, Airspace 
Designations and Reporting Points, dated July 21, 2020, and effective 
September 15, 2020. FAA Order 7400.11E is publicly available as listed 
in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11E lists 
Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and 
reporting points.

Background

    In 1986, the FAA issued a final rule that established the Fort 
Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport, FL, Airport Radar Service 
Area (ARSA) (51 FR 4872; February 7, 1986). As a result of the Airspace 
Reclassification final rule (56 FR 65638; December 17, 1991), which 
became effective in September 1993, the term ``Airport Radar Service 
Area'' was replaced by ``Class C airspace area.'' As with the former 
ARSA, the primary purpose of a Class C airspace area is to reduce the 
potential for midair collisions in terminal areas and promote the 
efficient management of air traffic in those areas. Pilots are required 
to establish two-way radio communications with air traffic control 
(ATC) before entering Class C airspace, and they must maintain two-way 
radio communications with ATC while

[[Page 17334]]

operating in Class C airspace. These requirements are designed to keep 
ATC informed of all aircraft operating within the Class C airspace 
area.

Developments Since the Origination of the FLL Class C Airspace Area

    Despite significant increases in aircraft operations and passenger 
enplanements at FLL over the years, the FLL Class C airspace area has 
not been modified since its inception in 1986.
    In 2014, runway 10R/28L was extended from 5,276 feet to 8,000 feet 
in length. The extension increased airport capacity by making two 
runways available to larger aircraft types instead of one.
    In 2008, FLL hosted 309,624 total operations, and 11,400,548 
passenger enplanements. By 2019, these numbers had grown to 331,455 
total operations, and 17,950,989 passenger enplanements. With these 
figures, FLL actually meets the criteria to be a candidate for the 
establishment of a Class B airspace area. In 2009, the FAA considered 
converting the FLL Class C airspace area to Class B airspace. However, 
as discussed later in this NPRM, the FAA decided that the airspace 
safety and efficiency goals could be satisfied by expanding the FLL 
Class C airspace area instead.

Impact of FLL Class C Airspace Area Configuration on Operations

    The current FLL Class C airspace area is not sufficient to 
accommodate the volume and diversity of aircraft operations in the 
congested South Florida airspace, nor the traffic patterns required by 
the increasing numbers of turbojet operations at FLL.
    The current FLL Class C airspace configuration has the following 
impacts on operations at FLL:
    1. Insufficient Class C airspace is available to provide for the 
most efficient arrival and departure operations at FLL. Significant 
numbers of visual flight rules (VFR) aircraft, which are not in contact 
with air traffic control (ATC), routinely operate in the same airspace 
outside of the FLL Class C area that is also used by aircraft operating 
to and from FLL. Under the proposal, these VFR aircraft would be 
required to establish contact with ATC enabling greater efficiency.
    2. Controllers must alter the approach profile of instrument flight 
rules (IFR) arrival traffic when unknown VFR aircraft are transitioning 
a gap between the existing Miami (MIA) Class B and FLL Class C airspace 
areas. This gap, which is approximately 4-5 nautical miles (NM) wide, 
exists in the airspace between the current 10 NM radius of the FLL 
Class C airspace (to the west of FLL), and the existing MIA Class B 
airspace area to the northwest of MIA (in the vicinity of U.S. Route 
27). VFR aircraft that are not in communication with ATC routinely 
transit this area and, in doing so, they climb or descend through the 
final approach courses and the downwind legs for FLL arrivals to 
runways 10L and 10R requiring commercial pilots to alter their flight 
path or altitude resulting in a disruption of the orderly flow of 
arrivals to the airport. Closing this airspace gap would enhance safety 
for FLL traffic.
    3. Increases workload for air traffic controllers due to the need 
for additional vectoring of FLL arrivals and departures to ensure 
separation from VFR aircraft not in communication with ATC.

Benefits of Modifying the FLL Class C Airspace Area

    Modifications of the current FLL Class C airspace area would 
enhance safety by lessening the likelihood of FLL arrivals and 
departures encountering unknown aircraft that are not in contact with 
ATC. The unique combination of high volumes of general aviation and 
commercial operations, plus intensive student pilot training, and 
transiting VFR aircraft that take place in the congested FLL terminal 
area support a proposal to expand the FLL Class C airspace area in the 
interest of safety and the efficient use of the airspace.
    The FAA believes that users would benefit from participation in the 
proposed expanded availability of Class C services around FLL which 
include: sequencing of all aircraft to the primary airport (FLL); 
standard IFR services to IFR aircraft; separation, traffic advisories, 
and safety alerts between IFR and VFR aircraft; and, mandatory traffic 
advisories and safety alerts between VFR aircraft.

Local Area Airport Identifiers

    For reference, the following airport identifiers are used in this 
NPRM:
BCT Boca Raton Airport
FLL Fort Lauderdale/Hollywood International Airport
FXE Fort Lauderdale Executive Airport
HWO North Perry Airport
MIA Miami International Airport
OPF Opa Locka Executive
PMP Pompano Beach Airpark
TMB Miami Executive Airport
X51 Miami Homestead General Aviation Airport

Pre-NPRM Public Input

    In 2010, the FAA initiated action to form an Ad Hoc Committee 
(Committee) to seek input and recommendations from representatives of 
effected aviation segments for the FAA to consider in designing 
proposed modifications to the Miami International Airport (MIA), Class 
B airspace area, and to convert the FLL Class C airspace area to Class 
B airspace. Participants in the Committee included representatives from 
the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA), Miami-Dade Aviation 
Department, Miami-Dade Police Department Aviation Unit, Florida DOT, 
Broward County Aviation Department, Opa-Locka Helicopters, ADF Airways, 
Sheltair Aviation, National Jets, Aerial Banners, Delta Connection, 
Florida Aero Club, and Van Wagner Aerial Media.

Discussion of Ad Hoc Committee Recommendations

    The Ad Hoc Committee submitted three recommendations for the FAA to 
consider in designing proposed modifications of the MIA Class B 
airspace area, and the proposed conversion of the FLL Class C airspace 
area to Class B airspace.
    The Committee recommended that the FAA align the boundaries of the 
Class B airspace with prominent geographical features (visual 
landmarks) whenever possible.
    The FAA agrees and tries to adopt the use of geographical features 
whenever possible. However, areas that overlie the Atlantic Ocean and 
the Florida Everglades lack prominent landmarks. Currently, there are 
approximately 25 VFR checkpoints, four VFR waypoints, and five 
latitude/longitude points depicted on the VFR Flyway Planning Chart in 
the MIA/FLL area. The FAA is considering additional points to enhance 
VFR navigation in the area.
    The Committee recommended that the FAA establish a VFR Corridor 
between 3,000 feet and 5,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) that extends 
from the northern edge of FLL's airspace to the southern edge of MIA's 
airspace, to permit north-south transition of aircraft. The Committee 
suggested that this would be similar to the Los Angeles Special Flight 
Rules Area, which traverses the Los Angeles Class B airspace. Very High 
Frequency Omnidirectional Range (VOR) radials should be used to define 
the centerline of the Corridor enabling both VOR and GPS equipped 
aircraft to navigate the corridor.
    The FAA could not adopt this recommendation because a VFR corridor 
is essentially a ``tunnel'' through Class B airspace within which 
aircraft may operate without an ATC Clearance or communication with 
ATC. For this reason, a VFR Corridor is not feasible for this area 
based on

[[Page 17335]]

operational constraints such as traffic volume and traffic flows. MIA 
arrival traffic descends from 8,000 feet MSL to 3,000 feet MSL in the 
downwind leg. Departures climb to 5,000 feet MSL initially, and 
aircraft executing a go-around climb to either 3,000 feet MSL or 4,000 
feet MSL. For FLL, arrivals descend from 6,000 feet MSL to 3,000 feet 
MSL in the downwind leg. Departures climb to 3,000 feet MSL initially, 
and aircraft executing a go-around climb to 2,000 feet MSL or 3,000 
feet MSL. Since aircraft could operate in the corridor without an ATC 
clearance or communication with ATC, this would present a safety 
hazard, especially during irregular operations, such as weather 
impacting the normal arrival and departure routes.
    Alternatively, there is a charted VFR Flyway below 3,000 feet MSL, 
running generally north and south, that is located beneath the western 
side of the MIA Class B airspace area. Additionally, an east-west 
oriented Flyway below 2,000 feet MSL is located to the south of 
Hollywood North Perry airport (HWO), and to the north of Miami-Opa 
Locka Executive airport (OPF).
    The Committee recommended that the FAA develop ``shoreline 
transitions'' for VFR aircraft through the Class B airspace. 
Specifically, this would accommodate pilots who desire to operate over 
or near the shoreline east of FLL. The Committee added that the FAA 
should publish information on Sectional and Terminal Area Charts (TAC) 
to advise aircraft requesting shoreline transitions to contact MIA 
Approach; including frequencies, designated entry and exit points, 
expected altitudes, and times requests may be approved.
    The FAA reviewed this recommendation and, although shoreline 
transitions do exist in the Miami area, due to the close proximity of 
FLL to the shoreline, a shoreline transition is not feasible in that 
area.
    After full consideration of the Committee's discussions and 
recommendations, the FAA decided to pursue an alternative airspace 
design for FLL. Rather than converting the Class C airspace area at FLL 
to Class B airspace, the FAA proposes to retain, but expand, the 
existing FLL Class C airspace area. This alternative would provide all 
the benefits that could be achieved with the original FLL Class B 
concept but with less impact on local VFR and general aviation 
operations. This NPRM proposes modifications to the FLL Class C 
airspace area. The proposed modifications of the MIA Class B airspace 
area was addressed in a separate NPRM. (86 FR 12868, March 5, 2021).

Discussion of Informal Airspace Meeting Comments

    As announced in the Federal Register on December 4, 2012, the FAA 
conducted three informal airspace meetings: January 28, 2013, at the 
Wings Over Miami Air Museum, Miami, FL; January 29, 2013, at Miami Dade 
College, Miami, FL; and January 30, 2013, Miramar Town Center, Miramar, 
FL. (77 FR 71734). Additionally, as announced in the Federal Register 
on April 1, 2019, the FAA also held one informal airspace meeting on 
June 12, 2019, at Broward College, Pembroke Pines, FL. (84 FR 12146). 
These meetings provided interested airspace users with an opportunity 
to present their views and offer recommendations regarding the planned 
modification of the FLL Class C airspace area. The FAA received 
comments from 32 individuals in response to the four meetings. The FAA 
received a number of comments from the January 2013 meetings that 
pertained specifically to the proposed modification of the MIA Class B 
airspace area. Those comments are addressed in a separate NPRM that 
proposes to modify the MIA Class B airspace. The NPRM was published in 
the Federal Register on March 5, 2021 (86 FR 12868). You may read the 
MIA Class B NPRM on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov. Enter 
the search term FAA-2020-0490.

January 2013 Informal Airspace Meeting Comments

    Many commenters asked that the FLL Class C airspace boundaries be 
based on visual ground references such as highways and landmarks to 
assist VFR pilots in identifying the lateral boundaries of the area. 
One commenter wrote that the FAA should consider a physical feature, 
such as University Avenue, to define the western side of the Class C 
surface area's 7 NM radius.
    The FAA agrees and has incorporated well-known roads such as U.S. 
Route 27, I-75, Oakland Park Boulevard, etc., into the proposed 
description of the FLL Class C airspace area. Regarding a reference for 
the surface area, a suitable pilotage landmark that is already charted 
is the Snake Creek Canal that runs parallel to Flamingo Road in Broward 
County. The canal is about 1 to 2 miles outside the western edge of the 
surface area. Use of that visual landmark would ensure that VFR pilots 
remain clear of the surface area.
    A commenter wrote that, with the expansion of the Class C airspace 
area, it is important that adequate ATC staffing be provided to handle 
the higher number of VFR aircraft transitioning the area.
    The proposed airspace change would affect the Miami Terminal Radar 
Approach Control (TRACON) controller workload with an anticipated 
increase of aircraft requesting flight following services. Miami TRACON 
provides IFR services to traffic operating to and from FLL. The comment 
is valid and actions have been taken to address this concern. 
Considering the anticipated greater workload, the FAA has increased the 
utilization of additional radar positions that provide relief for 
controllers working the Opa Locka Executive Airport (OPF)/North Perry 
Airport (HWO) area. These additional positions split the workload in 
half (east side and west side) and provide extra capacity to handle 
flight following services. It is suggested that pilots consider 
obtaining a discrete transponder code from air traffic control before 
takeoff to ensure that flight following in VFR conditions can commence 
shortly after departure.
    One commenter suggested that the FAA consider a VFR Corridor within 
the Class C airspace that takes VFR aircraft from the coast to overhead 
FLL at 1,500 feet MSL southbound, and 2,000 feet MSL northbound, and 
back out to the coast.
    The procedures for overflights at FLL are governed by a Letter of 
Agreement (LOA) between MIA ATCT and FLL ATCT. Aircraft operating from 
the coast to transition over FLL may currently contact FLL ATCT to 
transition at or below 1,000 feet MSL along the shoreline. Aircraft 
transitioning VFR over FLL, in communication with MIA TRACON, are 
provided transition at or above 2,500 feet MSL. The 2,500-foot 
restriction is intended to allow aircraft on a missed approach climb to 
2,000 feet MSL per the LOA. A designated VFR corridor at 1,500 feet MSL 
or 2,000 feet MSL is not feasible due to traffic volume and the 
provisions of the LOA.
    Several commenters were concerned that the Class C expansion would 
encroach upon student pilot training in the practice areas, such as 
alert areas A-291B and A-291C, by reducing the airspace available for 
training in this congested area. Additionally, a commenter noted that 
numerous flight schools operate out of FXE. There is concern that the 
proposed northern boundary of the Class C airspace area could eliminate 
an avenue for student pilots transitioning to and from the practice 
areas. The commenter argued that this might cause flight schools to 
cease operations at FXE.
    The current floor of Class C airspace over FXE is at 1,200 feet 
MSL. The FAA

[[Page 17336]]

proposes to establish Class C Area F (described below) over FXE. Area F 
would be bounded in the north along lat. 26[deg]13'53''N (aligned with 
the eastern portion of Atlantic Boulevard located in Pompano Beach), 
which lies to the north of FXE. To the south of FXE, the southern 
boundary of Area F would be defined by lat. 26[deg]10'03''N (aligned 
with the eastern most portion of Oakland Park Boulevard located in 
Lauderdale Beach). The floor of Class C airspace in Area F would be 
2,500 feet MSL instead of the current 1,200 feet MSL. The change would 
provide more room for operations to and from FXE without the need for 
pilots to enter Class C airspace.
    A commenter said that traffic flying to and from North Perry 
Airport (HWO) and Opa Locka Executive Airport (OPF) will be boxed in by 
the Class C 1,200-foot MSL shelf causing them to fly low when 
travelling to and from the northern areas. The commenter also stated 
that access to FXE and Pompano Airpark (PMP) would be greatly decreased 
by the requirement to fly below 1,200 feet MSL.
    Aircraft operating to and from HWO and OPF can still transition 
below the MIA Class B airspace area below 3,000 feet MSL to join the 
charted VFR Flyways beneath the MIA Class B and the proposed FLL Class 
C airspace areas. The 2,500-foot MSL Class C floor in the proposed Area 
F (discussed above) would enhance access to HWO and PMP. Note that PMP 
is outside the proposed northern boundary of the Class C airspace area.
    Another commenter flying from HWO said that the western most edge 
of the FLL Class C airspace area should run along U.S. Route 27. 
According to the commenter, for students flying out over the 
Everglades, U.S. Route 27 is the last visual reference they could use 
to tell if they are clear of the Class C airspace and it is safe to 
climb. Without that reference, according to the commenter, students 
would have to fly out much farther to ensure they are actually clear of 
the Class C airspace.
    U.S. Route 27 marks the eastern boundary of proposed FLL Class C 
Area C, which would extend westward to the 25 NM radius of FLL. The 
floor of Area C would be at 3,000 feet MSL. U.S. Route 27 could still 
be used as a visual reference to indicate the point beyond which an 
altitude below 3,000 feet MSL would be clear of the proposed FLL Class 
C airspace area. Additionally, a canal intersecting a pumping station 
along Interstate I-75 can be used as a visual landmark for the western 
most portion of Area C. There is also a major rest area on the highway 
at that location.
    A commenter highlighted another concern about the current Class C 
configuration involving FXE. The commenter stated that when FXE ATCT 
issues a right downwind departure off runway 9, the pilot has to rush 
to get acknowledged by Miami Approach in order to not violate the Class 
C airspace area. The commenter asked if the north end of the Class C 
could be sliced off at Oakland Park Boulevard; or, if not, could the 
floor of the Class C north of Oakland Park Boulevard be raised to 1,600 
feet MSL or more.
    The FAA determined that the northern boundary of the FLL Class C 
airspace area could not be set along Oakland Park Boulevard as 
suggested. Oakland Park Boulevard conflicts with the proposed Class C 
surface area. The current Class C extends well above Oakland Park 
Boulevard. Setting the northern boundary of the Class C along Atlantic 
Boulevard instead provides more vectoring room north of FLL. The 
proposed Class C modification would establish Area F, with a floor of 
2,500 feet MSL, over FXE. This would provide more room that is beneath 
the Class C airspace to accommodate the downwind departure.
    Two commenters raised the issue that setting the Class C airspace 
floor at 1,200-foot MSL, 14 NM from the airport, as contained in the 
original proposal, seems unprecedented. The commenter suggested some 
interim altitude, such as 1,600 feet MSL, would give users more 
flexibility.
    After consideration of the comment, the FAA is modifying the 
proposal by adding a FLL Class C Subarea E (described below) that would 
be bounded on the east by Interstate I-75, and on the west by U.S. 
Route 27. The proposed floor of the Class C airspace in Area E would be 
1,500 feet MSL instead of the original 1,200 feet MSL. Aircraft 
operating at FLL already overfly this area. The objective of this 
airspace proposal is to provide the least restrictive, yet safe 
operation in the terminal area.
    One commenter contended that ATC never clears aircraft through 
Class C airspace, except for occasional direct overflights.
    FAA records show that, in the 12 months ending May 31, 2017, FLL 
ATCT worked 313,802 operations with 303 IFR overflights and 16,234 VFR 
overflights.
    A commenter stated that the substantial extensions of Class C 
airspace east and west of FLL would force pilots to fly deeper into the 
everglades or farther out to sea to avoid the Class C airspace. The 
commenter added that, if the changes are implemented, Flyways should be 
created for both VFR and IFR traffic whose destinations are within the 
South Florida area.
    The FAA acknowledges these concerns. However, considering this 
extremely busy and congested South Florida airspace that includes 
intensive student flight training, a high volume of VFR transit 
operations, as well as large numbers of commercial operations, the 
proposed FLL Class C airspace modifications are essential to 
maintaining safety and reducing the risk of midair collisions in the 
terminal area. A north-south oriented VFR Flyway, below 3,000 feet MSL, 
is currently depicted on the Miami VFR Flyway Planning Chart (on the 
reverse side of the Miami Terminal Area Chart). This Flyway is located 
beneath the western side of the Miami Class B airspace area, and the 
proposed FLL Class C airspace area. The FAA is also considering 
additional Flyways though the area.

June 2019 Informal Airspace Meeting Comments

    Over 60 people attended the June 2019 informal airspace meeting.
    Two commenters expressed concerns that receiving VFR flight 
following in the area can be challenging due to air traffic controller 
workload, and that consideration should be given to adequate staffing 
to provide this additional service routinely. This comment was also 
received at the January 2013 informal airspace meetings.
    The proposed airspace change would affect the Miami Terminal Radar 
Approach Control (TRACON) controller workload with an anticipated 
increase of aircraft requesting flight following services. Miami TRACON 
provides IFR services to traffic operating to and from FLL. The comment 
is valid and actions have been taken to address this concern. 
Considering the anticipated greater workload, the FAA has increased the 
utilization of additional radar positions that provide relief for 
controllers working the Opa Locka Executive Airport (OPF)/North Perry 
Airport (HWO) area. These additional positions split the workload in 
half (east side and west side) and provide extra capacity to handle 
flight following services. It is suggested that pilots consider 
obtaining a discrete transponder code from air traffic control before 
takeoff to ensure that flight following in VFR conditions can commence 
shortly after departure.
    One commenter was concerned that the expansion of the FLL Class C 
airspace area would create a precedent for other locations.

[[Page 17337]]

    The purpose of Class C airspace is to reduce the risk of midair 
collisions in the terminal area. A number of considerations are 
evaluated before determining whether an airport qualifies for the 
establishment or modification of a Class C airspace area. Proposed 
Class C airspace area designs are based on site-specific factors such 
as traffic volume and complexity.
    A commenter suggested a north/south corridor be provided through 
the FLL Class C airspace area.
    Procedures for overflights at FLL are governed by a LOA between 
Miami Airport Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) and FLL ATCT. Current 
procedures allow aircraft to transition over FLL at 2,500 feet MSL 
under two-way radio communication with ATC at Miami TRACON; or at low 
level over the shoreline after establishing two-way radio communication 
with FLL ATCT. Both transitions provide protection from aircraft 
departing/arriving at FLL. Currently, if ATC is unable to approve a 
transition request, the charted VFR Flyways to the west of FLL are 
available as an option.
    Another commenter said that ATC LOAs should be published for easy 
access by pilots.
    As an initial matter, this comment falls outside the scope of this 
rulemaking. Moreover, LOAs between ATC facilities outline procedures 
between facilities to allow for a standard operation, such as 
interfacility coordination, etc. LOAs do not dictate procedures that 
pilots who are not operating under ATC instructions need to follow. 
Because LOAs outline the handling of aircraft and interaction between 
ATC facilities, they are not made readily available to pilots. Whenever 
a pilot is uncertain about an ATC clearance or instruction, that pilot 
must immediately request clarification from ATC.
    A commenter stated that expansion of the FLL Class C airspace area 
should conform to readily recognized landmarks, such as canals, and 
streets, to describe the boundaries.
    The FAA agrees and, where feasible, has amended the proposed FLL 
Class C airspace area description to use various streets, such as U.S. 
Route 27, Interstate 75, Oakland Park Boulevard, etc., to define the 
boundaries.
    Four commenters cited concerns that the originally proposed 
northern boundary of the FLL Class C airspace area, located just south 
of Pompano Beach Airpark (PMP), with a floor of 1,200 feet MSL, would 
interfere with Class D airspace operations at FXE and PMP. The 
commenters requested that the Class C airspace north of FLL be modified 
to provide a cutout with a higher floor allowing increased clearance 
for VFR access to Fort Lauderdale Executive Airport (FXE).
    Based on previous public comments with the same concern, the FAA 
raised the proposed floor of the Class C airspace shelf over FXE to 
2,500 feet MSL and moved the proposed northern Class C airspace 
boundary southward to align along the eastern portion of Atlantic 
Boulevard, located in Pompano Beach. These changes allow VFR aircraft 
to safely maintain separation from FLL arrival and departure traffic, 
while maximizing the amount of operational airspace available for 
pilots operating VFR.
    One commenter requested the FAA form a new Ad Hoc Committee to 
provide updated recommendations regarding the proposed airspace design.
    The FAA originated the Ad Hoc Committee concept as a means to get 
preliminary user input during the initial design phase of Class B and C 
airspace proposals, prior to the issuance of an NPRM.
    The FAA carefully considered the request to form a second Ad Hoc 
Committee. Although significant time has elapsed since the Committee 
submitted its report, its recommendations remain valid. After full 
consideration of the Committee's concerns and recommendations, 
including the Committee's stated desire that the FAA mitigate the 
impact to operators outside the Class B airspace area, and improve the 
design originally presented to the Committee, the FAA re-evaluated the 
airspace design requirements for the airspace surrounding MIA and FLL. 
Based on that re-evaluation, the FAA will pursue the alternative to 
retain, but modify, Class C airspace at FLL, as well as modifying the 
MIA Class B airspace. This would result in less impact to the VFR and 
general aviation communities. Further, the public comments received in 
response to the informal airspace meetings held in 2013 and 2019 led to 
changes that were incorporated into the proposed airspace designs.
    Based on the above, the FAA concluded that sufficient initial 
feedback was received so that the FAA could develop and publish the 
airspace proposal in an NPRM. The NPRM's 60-day comment period provides 
an additional opportunity for the public to submit their views on the 
proposed FLL Class C airspace modification. Therefore, the FAA has 
decided against reforming an Ad Hoc Committee for this proposal.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to 14 CFR part 71 to modify the 
FLL Class C airspace area by expanding the lateral dimensions to the 
east and west of the airport, and lowering of some airspace floors to 
enhance safety in the Fort Lauderdale terminal area (see the attached 
chart).
    The current FLL Class C airspace area consists of two concentric 
circles centered on the airport reference point: (1) That airspace 
extending upward from the surface to 4,000 feet MSL within a 5 NM 
radius of the airport; and (2) that airspace extending upward from 
1,200 feet MSL to 4,000 feet MSL within a 10 NM radius of the airport. 
(excluding the airspace within the adjacent Miami Class B airspace 
area).
    This proposal would update the FLL airport reference point 
coordinates to read ``lat. 26[deg]04'18'' N, long. 80[deg]08'59'' W'' 
which reflects the latest information in the Airport Master Records 
file. In addition, the proposal would reconfigure the Class C airspace 
area from the two concentric circles design, to a more rectangular 
shape consisting of seven sub-areas identified by the letters A though 
G. The foot print of the area would be expanded to the east and west, 
but the current 4,000-foot MSL ceiling of the Class C airspace area 
would be retained. The proposed modifications are described below. In 
developing these modifications, the FAA has considered the input 
received from the Ad Hoc Committee, and the informal airspace meetings.
    Area A. The proposed Area A is a modification of the current 
surface area that extends from ground level upward to 4,000 feet MSL. 
Area A would be expanded from the current 5 NM radius of FLL, to a 7 NM 
radius of the airport. It would be bounded on the north by lat. 
26[deg]10'03''N (the eastern most portion of Oakland Park Boulevard 
located in Lauderdale Beach); and bounded on the south by a 15 NM 
radius of the Miami International Airport; and on the southeast by lat. 
26[deg]00'39''N (the eastern most portion of Hollywood Boulevard 
located in Hollywood).
    Setting the northern boundary of Area A along lat. 26[deg]10'03''N 
would allow Fort Lauderdale Executive Airport (FXE) to continue using 
south downwind departures from the airport and return most of the FXE 
Class D airspace area altitudes to FXE ATCT for their use. The proposed 
southeastern boundary of Area A would allow aircraft departing North 
Perry Airport (HWO) and Opa Locka Executive Airport (OPF) more room to 
transition to the east overwater.

[[Page 17338]]

    Area B. Area B, located west of Area A, would extend upward from 
1,200 feet MSL to 4,000 feet MSL. It would be bounded on the north by 
lat. 26[deg]10'03''N; on the west by State Road 869/Sawgrass 
Expressway, Interstate 595 and Interstate 75; on the south by the 15 NM 
radius of Miami International Airport; and on the east by the 7 NM 
radius of FLL (the western boundary of Area A). The use of existing 
major roadways would give VFR pilots better awareness of the airspace 
boundaries.
    Area C. Area C would be located at the western end of the Class C 
expansion. It would extend upward from 3,000 feet MSL to 4,000 feet 
MSL. Area C would be bounded on the north by lat. 26[deg]13'53''N 
(aligned with the eastern portion of Atlantic Boulevard located in 
Pompano Beach) (which is also the proposed northern boundary of FLL 
Class C airspace area); on the west by the 25 NM radius of FLL; on the 
south by lat. 25[deg]57'48''N; on the southeast by the 15 NM radius of 
MIA; and on the east by U.S. Route 27. Route 27 was selected as the 
eastern boundary based on suggestions that visual references be used to 
provide better situational awareness for VFR pilots.
    Area D. Area D would be located at the eastern end of the Class C 
expansion. It would extend upward from 3,000 feet MSL to 4,000 feet 
MSL. It would be bounded on the north by lat. 26[deg]13'53''N (aligned 
with the eastern portion of Atlantic Boulevard located in Pompano 
Beach); on the east by the 25 NM radius of FLL; on the south by lat. 
26[deg]00'39''N (the eastern most portion of Hollywood Boulevard 
located in Hollywood); and on the west by the 20 NM radius of FLL. Area 
D would form the eastern most section of the proposed FLL Class C 
airspace area. In the original design, the Class C floor in Area D was 
proposed to be 2,500 feet MSL. To accommodate concerns, the proposed 
floor is raised to 3,000 feet MSL to give VFR pilots a little more room 
to transition beneath the area.
    Area E. Area E would extend upward from 1,500 feet MSL to 4,000 
feet MSL. It would be bounded on the north by lat. 26[deg]10'03''N (the 
eastern most portion of Oakland Park Boulevard located in Lauderdale 
Beach); on the east by the north-south portion of Interstate I-75 and 
State Road 869/Sawgrass Expressway; on the south by the 15 NM radius of 
MIA; and on the west by U.S. Route 27. Area E would be located between 
Areas B and C.
    A goal of the design of Area E is to resolve an issue caused by the 
configurations of the current MIA Class B airspace and the FLL Class C 
airspace areas. A gap, approximately 4-5 NM wide, exists in the 
airspace between the current 10 NM radius of FLL's Class C airspace (to 
the west of the airport), and the existing MIA Class B airspace area to 
the northwest of MIA (in the vicinity of U.S. Route 27). VFR aircraft 
that are not in communication with ATC frequently transit this gap and 
are climbing or descending through the final approach courses and the 
downwind legs for FLL arrivals to runways 10L/10R. The proposed design 
of Area E is intended to close this gap to enhance safety for both FLL 
traffic and the transiting VFR aircraft. The original proposal set the 
Class C airspace floor in this area at 1,200 feet MSL. Due to concerns 
about restricting VFR aircraft transiting the area, the proposed Area E 
floor is raised to 1,500 feet MSL to give VFR aircraft more room to 
transition north and south. The use of existing major roadways to mark 
the boundaries gives VFR pilots better situational awareness of the 
lateral confines of Area E.
    Area F. Area F would extend upward from 2,500 feet MSL to 4,000 
feet MSL. The area's boundaries would begin at a point northwest of FLL 
where U.S. Route 27 intersects lat. 26[deg]13'53''N (aligned with the 
eastern portion of Atlantic Boulevard in Pompano Beach); thence moving 
east along lat. 26[deg]13'53''N to a point that intersects the 20 NM 
radius of FLL; thence moving clockwise along the 20 NM radius of FLL to 
a point that intersects lat. 26[deg]00'39''N; (the eastern most portion 
of Hollywood Boulevard located in Hollywood); thence moving west along 
lat. 26[deg]00'39''N to a point that intersects the 15 NM radius of 
FLL; thence moving counter-clockwise along the 15 NM radius of FLL to a 
point that intersects lat. 26[deg]10'03''N (the eastern most portion of 
Oakland Park Boulevard located in Lauderdale Beach); thence moving west 
along lat. 26[deg]10'03''N to a point that intersects U.S. route 27; 
thence moving north along U.S. Route 27 to the point of beginning. Area 
F forms the northern shelf of the FLL Class C airspace area, running 
east and west between areas C and D, as well as a north/south segment 
running between Areas G and D.
    With today's FLL Class C airspace configuration, the floor of Class 
C airspace over FXE is 1,200 feet MSL. This 1,200-foot floor extends 
right up to PMP. Within the proposed Area F, the Class C airspace floor 
would be raised to 2,500 feet MSL over FXE, and the northern boundary 
of Class C airspace would be moved farther to the south of PMP and 
aligned with the eastern portion of Atlantic Boulevard. This proposed 
2,500-foot MSL Class C airspace shelf over FXE, and southward 
relocation of the northern Class C airspace boundary to be aligned with 
Atlantic Boulevard, provides a number of benefits, including: The use 
of visual references for airspace boundaries; better access for VFR 
pilots to the FXE and PMP areas; additional room below Class C airspace 
to accommodate downwind departures from FXE; better access for the 
flight schools based at FXE and PMP to airspace that is regularly used 
for flight training; and providing FXE and PMP ATCTs access to more 
altitudes within their Class D airspace areas.
    Area G. Area G would extend upward from 1,200 feet MSL to 4,000 
feet MSL. The area boundaries would begin at a point northeast of FLL 
where the 7 NM radius of FLL intersects lat. 26[deg]10'03''N (the 
eastern most portion of Oakland Park Boulevard located in Lauderdale 
beach); thence moving clockwise along the 7 NM radius of FLL to a point 
that intersects lat. 26[deg]00'39''N (the eastern most portion of 
Hollywood Boulevard located in Hollywood); thence moving east along 
lat. 26[deg]00'39''N to a point that intersects the 15 NM radius of 
FLL; thence moving counterclockwise along the 15 NM radius of FLL to a 
point that intersects lat. 26[deg]10'03''N; thence moving west along 
lat. 26[deg]10'03''N, to the point of beginning. Area G would be 
located between Areas A and F.
    In addition, this action proposes to remove the Class E airspace 
extension to the FLL Class C airspace surface area (which would become 
Class C within Area A). The proposed expansion of Area A from the 
current 5 NM radius, to a 7 NM radius, would overlie the Class E 
airspace extension rendering it unnecessary.
    Class C airspace areas are published in paragraph 4000 of FAA Order 
7400.11E, dated July 21, 2020 and effective September 15, 2002, which 
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. Class E airspace areas 
designated as an extension to a Class C surface area are published in 
paragraph 6003 of FAA Order 7400.11E. The Class C airspace area and 
Class E airspace extension modifications proposed in this document 
would be published subsequently in the Order.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires 
that the FAA consider the impact of paperwork and other information 
collection burdens imposed on the public. The FAA has determined that 
there is no new information collection requirement associated with this 
proposed rule.

[[Page 17339]]

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    Changes to Federal regulations must undergo several economic 
analyses. First, Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563 direct 
that each Federal agency shall propose or adopt a regulation only upon 
a reasoned determination that the benefits of the intended regulation 
justify its costs. Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. 
L. 96-354) requires agencies to analyze the economic impact of 
regulatory changes on small entities. Third, the Trade Agreements Act 
(Pub. L. 96-39) prohibits agencies from setting standards that create 
unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. In 
developing U.S. standards, this Trade Act requires agencies to consider 
international standards and, where appropriate, that they be the basis 
of U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
(Pub. L. 104-4) requires agencies to prepare a written assessment of 
the costs, benefits, and other effects of proposed or final rules that 
include a Federal mandate likely to result in the expenditure by State, 
local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private 
sector, of $100 million or more annually (adjusted for inflation with 
base year of 1995). This portion of the preamble summarizes the FAA's 
analysis of the economic impacts of this proposed rule.
    In conducting these analyses, the FAA has determined that this 
proposed rule: (1) Is expected to have a minimal cost impact, (2) is 
not an economically ``significant regulatory action'' as defined in 
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, (3) is not significant under 
DOT's administrative procedure rule on rulemaking at 49 CFR 5.13; (4) 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities; (5) does not create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign 
commerce of the United States; and (6) does not impose an unfunded 
mandate on state, local, or tribal governments, or on the private 
sector by exceeding the threshold identified above. These analyses are 
summarized below.
    As discussed above, the FAA determined that changes put forth in 
this proposed rule would increase airspace safety and efficiency. The 
proposed rule would reconfigure and expand the FLL Class C airspace. 
Despite significant increases in aircraft operations and passenger 
enplanements over the years, the FLL Class C airspace has not been 
modified since its inception in 1986. The current Class C airspace area 
is not sufficient to accommodate the volume of aircraft operations in 
the congested South Florida airspace, nor the traffic pattern required 
by the increasing numbers of turbojet operations at FLL. The goals of 
the proposal are to reduce the risk of midair collisions and increase 
efficiency of air traffic operations in the FLL terminals.
    The proposed expansion to Class C airspace would affect the VFR and 
general aviation community. VFR operators would only need to make minor 
adjustments to accommodate the expansion. As mentioned above, the FAA 
considered recommendations from an Ad Hoc Committee as well as the four 
informal airspace meetings from the stakeholders on the planned 
modifications to the FLL airspace. The feedback resulted in changes to 
the airspace design with the intent of maintaining safety and 
minimizing the impact to operators using the surrounding airspace. 
Additionally, VFR operators can also use the current north-south 
charted VFR flyway below the 3,000-foot Class B floor to the west of 
MIA, which enables pilots to fly beneath the Class B, and east-west 
flyway below 2000 MSL located to the south of HWO, or to the north of 
Miami OPF. Therefore, the FAA expects the Class B modifications in this 
proposal would result in minimal cost to VFR operators. The FAA 
requests comments on the benefits and costs of this proposal to inform 
the final rule.
    The discussion presented in this section reflects conditions that 
predate the public health emergency concerning the novel coronavirus 
disease (COVID-19) in 2020. At the time of writing, there is 
uncertainty surrounding the timing of recovery and the long-term 
effects from the public health emergency. To the extent that there are 
lingering or lasting changes to general aviation and air carrier 
operations, the benefits and costs of the FLL Class C airspace 
modification in this proposal may vary relative to the level of future 
operations.

Regulatory Flexibility Determination

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) (RFA) 
establishes ``as a principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall 
endeavor, consistent with the objectives of the rule and of applicable 
statutes, to fit regulatory and informational requirements to the scale 
of the businesses, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions 
subject to regulation.'' To achieve this principle, agencies are 
required to solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to 
explain the rationale for their actions to assure that such proposals 
are given serious consideration.'' The RFA covers a wide-range of small 
entities, including small businesses, not-for-profit organizations, and 
small governmental jurisdictions.
    Agencies must perform a review to determine whether a rule will 
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. If the agency determines that it will, the agency must 
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis as described in the RFA. 
However, if an agency determines that a rule is not expected to have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, 
section 605(b) of the RFA provides that the head of the agency may so 
certify and a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required. The 
certification must include a statement providing the factual basis for 
this determination, and the reasoning should be clear.
    The proposed rule would modify Class C airspace around FLL. The 
change would affect general aviation operators using the airspace at or 
near FLL. Operators flying VFR would need to adjust their flight paths 
to avoid the modified Class C airspace. However, the modifications to 
Class C airspace are intended to be the least restrictive option while 
enhancing safety. Additionally, VFR operators can also use the current 
north-south charted VFR flyway below the 3,000-foot Class B floor to 
the west of MIA, which enables pilots to fly beneath the Class B, and 
east-west flyway below 2000 MSL located to the south of HWO, or to the 
north of Miami OPF. VFR pilots have the option to contact ATC at Miami 
TRACON or FLL ATCT, and request flight following, if desired. 
Therefore, as provided in section 605(b), the head of the FAA certifies 
that this rulemaking would not result in a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities.

International Trade Impact Assessment

    The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39), as amended by the 
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. L. 103-465), prohibits Federal 
agencies from establishing standards or engaging in related activities 
that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United 
States. Pursuant to these Acts, the establishment of standards is not 
considered an unnecessary obstacle to the foreign commerce of the 
United States, so long as the standard has a legitimate domestic 
objective, such as the protection of safety, and does not operate in a 
manner that excludes imports that meet this objective. The statute also 
requires consideration of international standards and, where 
appropriate, that they be the basis for

[[Page 17340]]

U.S. standards. The FAA has assessed the potential effect of this 
proposed rule and determined that it would improve safety and is 
consistent with the Trade Agreements Act.

Unfunded Mandates Assessment

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-
4) requires each Federal agency to prepare a written statement 
assessing the effects of any Federal mandate in a proposed or final 
agency rule that may result in an expenditure of $100 million or more 
(in 1995 dollars) in any one year by State, local, and tribal 
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector; such a mandate 
is deemed to be a ``significant regulatory action.'' The FAA currently 
uses an inflation-adjusted value of $155 million in $100 million. This 
proposed rule does not contain such a mandate; therefore, the 
requirements of Title II of the Act do not apply.

ICAO Considerations

    As part of this proposal relates to navigable airspace outside the 
United States, this notice is submitted in accordance with the 
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) International 
Standards and Recommended Practices.
    The application of International Standards and Recommended 
Practices by the Air Traffic Service, FAA, in areas outside the United 
States domestic airspace, is governed by the Convention on 
International Civil Aviation. Specifically, the FAA is governed by 
Article 12 and Annex 11, which pertain to the establishment of 
necessary air navigational facilities and services to promote the safe, 
orderly, and expeditious flow of civil air traffic. The purpose of 
Article 12 and Annex 11 is to ensure that civil aircraft operations on 
international air routes are performed under uniform conditions.
    The International Standards and Recommended Practices in Annex 11 
apply to airspace under the jurisdiction of a contracting state, 
derived from ICAO. Annex 11 provisions apply when air traffic services 
are provided and a contracting state accepts the responsibility of 
providing air traffic services over high seas or in airspace of 
undetermined sovereignty. A contracting state accepting this 
responsibility may apply the International Standards and Recommended 
Practices that are consistent with standards and practices utilized in 
its domestic jurisdiction.
    In accordance with Article 3 of the Convention, state-owned 
aircraft are exempt from the Standards and Recommended Practices of 
Annex 11. The United States is a contracting state to the Convention. 
Article 3(d) of the Convention provides that participating state 
aircraft will be operated in international airspace with due regard for 
the safety of civil aircraft. Since this proposal involves, in part, 
the designation of navigable airspace outside the United States, the 
Administrator consulted with the Secretary of State and the Secretary 
of Defense in accordance with the provisions of Executive Order 10854.
    The Department of State responded with no objection to the proposed 
expansion of the Miami Class B and Fort Lauderdale Class C airspace 
areas. The Department of Defense Policy Board on Federal Aviation 
(PBFA) concurred with comment on the proposal stating the following: 
``We would like to document our concerns that extending these areas 
into international airspace places additional restrictions and equipage 
requirements on aircraft who normally transit this airspace. 
Additionally we believe such ATC expansions could set a precedent and 
encourage/allow foreign nations to exert more restrictive control 
measures in other international airspaces with no limits to the lateral 
confines, all in the name of commerce and safety.''

Environmental Review

    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in 
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies 
and Procedures'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation 
Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR 
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 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 7400.11E, Airspace Designations and 
Reporting Points, dated July 21, 2020, and effective September 15, 
2020, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 4000--Subpart C--Class C Airspace

* * * * *

ASO FL C Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport, FL

Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport, FL
    (Lat. 26[deg]04'18''N, long. 80[deg]08'59''W)

Boundaries

    Area A. That airspace extending upward from the surface to and 
including 4,000 feet MSL within a 7 nautical mile radius of Fort 
Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport, excluding the airspace 
North of lat. 26[deg]10'03'' N (the eastern most portion of Oakland 
Park Boulevard located in Lauderdale Beach), and bounded on the 
south by a 15 nautical mile radius of Miami International Airport, 
and on the southeast by lat. 26[deg]00'39'' N (the eastern most 
portion of Hollywood Boulevard located in Hollywood).
    Area B. That airspace extending upward from 1,200 feet MSL to 
and including 4,000 feet MSL beginning at a point northwest of Fort 
Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport at the intersection of a 
7 nautical mile radius of Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International 
Airport and lat. 26[deg]10'03'' N, thence moving west along lat. 
26[deg]10'03'' N (the eastern most portion of Oakland Park Boulevard 
located in Lauderdale Beach), to a point that intersects State Road 
869/Sawgrass Expressway, thence moving south along State Road 869/
Sawgrass Expressway, [continuing south across the intersection of 
State Road 869/Sawgrass Expressway, Interstate 595, and Interstate 
75], and continuing south along Interstate 75 to a point that 
intersects a 15 nautical mile radius of Miami International Airport, 
thence moving clockwise along the 15 nautical mile radius to a point 
that intersects the 7 nautical mile radius of Fort Lauderdale-
Hollywood International Airport, thence moving clockwise along the 7 
nautical mile radius to the point of beginning.
    Area C. That airspace extending upward from 3,000 feet MSL to 
and including 4,000 feet MSL within an area bounded on the north by 
lat. 26[deg]13'53'' N (aligned with the eastern portion of Atlantic 
Boulevard located in Pompano Beach), on the west by a 25 nautical 
mile radius of Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport, on 
the South by lat. 25[deg]57'48'' N, on the southeast by a 15 
nautical mile radius of Miami International Airport, and on the east 
by US Route 27.
    Area D. That airspace extending upward from 3,000 feet MSL to 
and including 4,000 feet MSL within an area bounded on the north by 
lat. 26[deg]13'53'' N (aligned with the eastern portion of Atlantic 
Boulevard located in Pompano Beach), on the east by a 25 nautical 
mile radius of Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport, on 
the south by lat. 26[deg]00'39'' N (the eastern most portion of 
Hollywood Boulevard located in Hollywood), and on the west by a 20 
nautical mile radius of Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International 
Airport.

[[Page 17341]]

    Area E. That airspace extending upward from 1,500 feet MSL to 
and including 4,000 feet MSL within an area bounded on the north by 
lat. 26[deg]10'03'' N (the eastern most portion of Oakland Park 
Boulevard located in Lauderdale Beach), on the east by the north-
south portion of Interstate 75 and State Road 869/Sawgrass 
Expressway, on the south by a 15 nautical mile radius of Miami 
International Airport, and on the west by US Route 27.
    Area F. That airspace extending upward from 2,500 feet MSL to 
and including 4,000 feet MSL beginning northwest of Fort Lauderdale-
Hollywood International Airport at a point that intersects US Route 
27 and lat. 26[deg]13'53'' N (aligned with the eastern portion of 
Atlantic Boulevard located in Pompano Beach), thence moving east 
along lat. 26[deg]13'53'' N to a point that intersects a 20 nautical 
mile radius of Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport, 
thence moving clockwise along the 20 nautical mile radius to a point 
that intersects lat. 26[deg]00'39'' N (the eastern most portion of 
Hollywood Boulevard located in Hollywood), thence moving west to a 
point that intersects a 15 nautical mile radius of Fort Lauderdale-
Hollywood International Airport, thence moving counter-clockwise 
along the 15 nautical mile radius to a point that intersects lat. 
26[deg]10'03'' N (the eastern most portion of Oakland Park Boulevard 
located in Lauderdale Beach), thence moving west along lat. 
26[deg]10'03'' N to a point that intersects US Route 27, thence 
moving north along US Route 27 to the point of beginning.
    Area G. That airspace extending upward from 1,200 feet MSL to 
and including 4,000 feet MSL beginning northeast of Fort Lauderdale-
Hollywood International Airport at a point that intersects a 7 
nautical mile radius of Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International 
Airport and lat. 26[deg]10'03'' N (the eastern most portion of 
Oakland Park Boulevard located in Lauderdale Beach), thence moving 
clockwise along the 7 nautical mile radius to a point that 
intersects lat. 26[deg]00'39'' N (the eastern most portion of 
Hollywood Boulevard located in Hollywood), thence moving east along 
lat. 26[deg]00'39'' N to a point that intersects a 15 nautical mile 
radius of Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport, thence 
moving counter-clockwise along the 15 nautical mile radius to a 
point that intersects lat. 26[deg]10'03'' N, thence moving west 
along lat. 26[deg]10'03'' N to the point of beginning.

Paragraph 6003--Subpart E--Class E Airspace Areas Designated as an 
Extension to a Class C Surface Area.

[[Page 17342]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02AP21.000

ASO FL E3 Fort Lauderdale, FL [Remove]

    Issued in Washington, DC, on March 29, 2021.
George Gonzales,
Acting Manager, Rules and Regulations Group.
[FR Doc. 2021-06805 Filed 4-1-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P