Federal Aviation Administration July 29, 2005 – Federal Register Recent Federal Regulation Documents

An examination of controlled airspace for Salina Municipal Airport, KS has revealed discrepancies in the coordinates used in the legal description for the Class D and Class E airspace areas. This action corrects that discrepancy by incorporating the current coordinates for the Airport Reference Point, the Salina VORTAC and the FLORY LOM. This action also removes references to effective dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen from the legal descriptions for Class D airspace. The effective dates and times are now continuously published in the Airport/Facility Directory.

This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations, part 71 (14 CFR 71) by revising Class E airspace areas at Norfolk, NE. A review of the Class E airspace surface area and the Class E airspace area extending upward from 700 feet above ground level (AGL) at Norfolk, NE reveals neither area complies with criteria in FAA Orders. These airspace areas and their legal descriptions are modified to conform to the criteria in FAA Orders.

An examination of controlled airspace for Lincoln, NE revealed discrepancies in the airport name. This action corrects the airport name and removes references to effective dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen from the legal descriptions for Class C and Class E airspace. The effective dates and times are now continuously published in the Airport/Facility Directory.

This action revokes the GARRI Intersection as a compulsory reporting point. GARRI Intersection is located between the de- commissioned Drummond, MT Very High Frequency Omni-directional Range/ Tactical Air Navigation (VORTAC) and Butte, MT. The FAA has determined that this intersection is no longer needed in the National Airspace System (NAS).

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) announces that the O'Hare Modernization Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS), Final Section 4(f) and Section 6(f) Evaluation, and Final General Conformity Determination, for Chicago O'Hare International Airport, Chicago, Illinois, are available for public review. The FAA will accept comment on specific sections of the FEIS that have been updated and/or refined for purposes of the FEIS, in part, because of response to comments on the Draft EIS, Draft Section 4(f) and Section 6(f) Evaluation, and Draft General Conformity Determinations. The comment period is open as of the date of this Notice of Availability and closes Tuesday, September 6, 2005. The FAA will accept comments on updated and/or refined information in the following sections of the FEIS and the associated appendices: (1) Sections 3.6 and 3.7, of Chapter 3, Alternatives. (2) Section 5.6, Air Quality, of Chapter 5, Environmental Consequences. (3) Subsections 5.21.4 through 5.21.11, of Section 5.21, Environmental Justice, of Chapter 5, Environmental Consequences. (4) Section 5.8, Section 4(f) and Section 6(f) Resources, of Chapter 5, Environmental Consequences. (5) Section 5.22, Other Issues Relating to Cemetery Acquisition, of Chapter 5, Environmental Consequences. (6) Section 5.23, Issues Relating to Due Process Claims and Formal Adjudicative Processes, of Chapter 5, Environmental Consequences. (7) Chapter 7, Mitigation. The FEIS identifies alternatives intended to address the projected needs of the Chicago region by reducing delays at O'Hare, thereby enhancing capacity of the National Airspace System, and ensuring that terminal facilities and supporting infrastructure can efficiently accommodate airport users. All of the development alternatives would result in wetland, property acquisition, air quality and noise impacts, as well as other impacts. All comments are to be submitted to Michael W. MacMullen of the FAA, at the address shown below. The USACE and IEPA have requested that the FAA be the recipient of all comments regarding their actions. These comments must be sent to Michael W. MacMullen of the FAA at the address shown below, and the comments must be postmarked and e-mail must be sent by no later than 5 p.m., central standard time, Tuesday, September 6, 2005. The USACE participated in the EIS process because implementation of any development alternative, if selected, would require the USACE to approve issuance of a permit to fill wetlands under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act Section. The IEPA participated in the EIS process because implementation of any wetland development alternative, if selected, would also require IEPA to issue a Water Quality Certification under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act.