[Federal Register: June 7, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 110)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 36060-36066]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr07jn00-5]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 71
[Airspace Docket No. 97-AWA-1]
RIN 2120-AA66
Modification of the San Francisco Class B Airspace Area; CA
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action modifies the San Francisco, CA, Class B airspace
area. Specifically, this action raises the airspace ceiling from 8,000
to 10,000 feet mean sea level (MSL); lowers the airspace floor in a few
areas; combines and reconfigures several existing areas; and creates
some new areas. The FAA is taking this action to enhance safety, to
reduce the potential for midair collision, and to improve the
management of air traffic operations into, out of, and through the San
Francisco Class B airspace area, while accommodating the concerns of
airspace users.
EFFECTIVE DATE: 0901 UTC, September 7, 2000.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joseph C. White, Airspace and Rules
Division, ATA-400, Office of Air Traffic Airspace Management, Federal
Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC
20591; telephone: (202) 267-8783.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Availability of Final Rule
An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded from the FAA
regulations section of the Fedworld electronic bulletin board service
(telephone: (703) 321-3339) or the Federal Register's electronic
bulletin board service (telephone: (202) 512-1661) using a modem and
suitable communications software.
Internet users may reach the FAA's web page at http://www.faa.gov
or the Federal Register's web page at http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara
for access to recently published rulemaking documents.
Any person may obtain a copy of this final rule by submitting a
request to the Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Air Traffic
Airspace Management, Attention: Airspace and Rules Division, ATA-400,
800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling (202)
267-8783. Communications must identify the docket number of this final
rule. Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
NPRM's or final rules should contact the Federal Aviation
Administration, Office of Rulemaking, (202) 267-9677, to request a copy
of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
Distribution System, which describes the application procedure.
Related Rulemaking Actions
On May 21, 1970, the FAA published the Designation of Federal
Airways, Controlled Airspace, and Reporting Points Final Rule in the
Federal Register (35 FR 7782). This rule provided for the establishment
of Terminal Control Airspace (TCA) areas (now known as Class B airspace
areas).
On June 21, 1988, the FAA published the Transponder With Automatic
Altitude Reporting Capability Requirement Final Rule in the Federal
Register (53 FR 23356). This rule requires all aircraft to have an
altitude encoding transponder when operating within 30 nautical miles
(NM) of any designated Class B airspace area primary airport from the
surface up to 10,000 feet MSL. This rule excluded those aircraft that
were not originally certificated with an engine-driven electrical
system (or those that have not subsequently been certified with such a
system), balloons, or gliders operating outside of the Class B airspace
area, but within 30 NM of the primary airport.
On October 14, 1988, the FAA published the Terminal Control Area
Classification and Terminal Control Area Pilot and Navigation Equipment
Requirements Final Rule in the Federal Register (53 FR 40318). This
rule, in part, requires the pilot-in-command of a civil aircraft
operating within a Class B airspace area to hold at least a private
pilot certificate, except for a student pilot who has received certain
documented training.
On December 17, 1991, the FAA published the Airspace
Reclassification Final Rule in the Federal Register (56 FR 65638). This
rule discontinued the use of the term ``Terminal Control Area'' and
replaced it with the designation ``Class B airspace area.'' This change
in terminology is reflected in this final rule.
Background
The Class B airspace area program was developed to reduce the
potential for midair collision in the congested airspace surrounding
airports with high density air traffic operations by providing an area
wherein all aircraft are subject to certain operating rules and
equipment requirements.
The density of traffic and the type of operations being conducted
in the airspace surrounding major terminals increase the probability of
midair collisions. In 1970, an extensive study found that the majority
of midair collisions occurred between a general aviation (GA) aircraft
and an air carrier or military aircraft, or another GA aircraft. The
basic causal factor common to these conflicts was the mix of aircraft
operating under visual flight rules (VFR) and aircraft operating under
instrument flight rules (IFR). Class B airspace areas provide a method
to accommodate the increasing number of IFR and VFR operations. The
regulatory requirements of these airspace areas afford the greatest
protection for the greatest number of people by giving air traffic
control (ATC) the increased capability to provide aircraft separation
service,
[[Page 36061]]
thereby minimizing the mix of controlled and uncontrolled aircraft.
The standard configuration of these airspace areas normally contain
three concentric circles centered on the primary airport extending to
10, 20, and 30 NM, respectively. The standard vertical limit of these
airspace areas normally should not exceed 10,000 feet MSL, with the
floor established at the surface in the inner area and at levels
appropriate to the containment of operations in the outer areas.
Variations of these criteria may be utilized contingent on the terrain,
adjacent regulatory airspace, and factors unique to the terminal area.
Public Input
On March 1, 1999, the FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) in the Federal Register (Airspace Docket No. 97-AWA-1; 64 FR
9940) proposing to modify the San Francisco, CA, Class B airspace area.
The comment period for this NPRM closed on April 30, 1999.
The FAA received 145 written comments in response to the proposal.
All comments received were considered before making a determination on
this final rule. An analysis of the comments received and the FAA's
response is summarized below.
Discussion of Comments
The FAA received some letters that fully endorsed and supported the
entire airspace modification proposal based on the positive benefits
expected from aviation safety improvements. On the other hand, an equal
number of letters expressed complete opposition to the proposal,
viewing it as either unnecessary or overly restrictive. The remaining
majority of comments (over 100) focused on one or more specific
airspace design issues. The following discussion provides an overview
of the key airspace issues of concern, and related FAA decisions
reflected in this final rule.
Several commenters noted that the NPRM document was difficult for
them to decipher due to the use of true north, rather than magnetic
north. The FAA understands how it is possible that this may have
confused some readers. However, due to magnetic variation changes over
time, it is FAA policy to use reference to true north in airspace
rulemaking documents.
The proposed expansion of the Area A southern boundary from 5NM to
6NM from the San Francisco (SFO) VHF Omni-directional Range/Distance
Measuring Equipment (VOR/DME) was strongly opposed by nearly all
general aviation pilots and by some airport officials. The most common
reason cited for opposition was that the proposed modification would
adversely affect the Bay Meadows noise abatement departure procedure
from San Carlos Airport which supports a busy VFR route used primarily
for general aviation flights to Half Moon Bay. One commenter stated
that the 5NM boundary line sufficiently protects low altitude arrivals
from the northwest entering downwind for Runways 28L and 28R at San
Francisco. Another observation was expressed that during operations in
the East configuration, departures were not assigned headings any
further right than 120 degrees due to steep terrain south of the
airport. The predominant viewpoint expressed by those who commented on
Area A was that the existing airspace should not be modified.
Based on the information received during the NPRM comment process,
and after further airspace analysis, the FAA agrees that the existing
Area A southern boundary line should not be modified at this time. The
final rule has been revised accordingly.
Several commenters suggested that the floor of the airspace near
Mt. Tamalpais should be higher that proposed 4,000 feet MSL. Many
expressed concern that the proposed floor would adversely affect hang
gliders, paragliders, and other soaring activity, and that the proposed
change might increase the potential for conflicts between powered and
non-powered aircraft. One commenter believed that the proposed
expansions of Area H and Area I were not warranted because only one
instrument departure procedure from San Francisco would be encompassed
in the proposed airspace areas. Some commenters suggested that a 6,000
feet MSL floor at Mt. Tamalpais would allow recreational soaring to
continue in a safe manner at that location.
The FAA agrees that the Mt. Tamalpais area users would be
constrained if the proposed expansion of Class B airspace were
implemented. Therefore, the FAA has determined, based on a clearer
understanding of user needs and additional analysis of the airspace,
that the MOLEN departure procedure can be adequately and safely
protected in Class B airspace without disrupting activities at Mt.
Tamalpais. This final rule establishes a smaller airspace area with a
floor of 4,000 feet MSL located southwest of Mt. Tamalpais to provide
protection for the MOLEN departures from San Francisco.
Several comments from glider pilots, and the organizations
representing them, recommended that the proposed new Class B airspace
area between 25NM and 30NM from SFO VOR/DME should be limited to the
airspace located south and west of the SFO VOR/DME 082 deg. radial. The
reason cited for this recommendation was that northwest winds over Mt.
Diablo often extend the viable soaring area to about 10 miles south of
the peak. Because very few sailplanes have VOR receivers, the
commenters suggested a revision to the proposed airspace boundary line
that would allow pilots to use visual reference to Interstate 580 as a
guideline for remaining outside Class B airspace.
The FAA appreciates receiving the recommendation of a prominent
landmark to enhance safety and reduce deviations. The rationale offered
by the commenters is reasonable, and their suggested revision to the
airspace boundary line is adopted in this final rule.
Several comments were received regarding the FAA proposal to
implement Class B airspace in the Sunol gap area, also known as the
``keyhole'', from 15NM to 25NM east of San Francisco. The primary
concerns expressed were related to the fact that the area if heavily
used as a VFR route to and from the San Francisco area communities.
Since the airspace is also frequently subject to marine layer stratus
cloud formations during spring and summer, concerns were expressed that
VFR traffic might become overly compressed in the area between the
proposed airspace floor and the mountainous terrain, thereby increasing
collision risks. Some commenters suggested that the floor of the
airspace should be 4,000 feet MSL to the east between 15NM and 20NM
from the SFO VOR/DME to allow additional altitude for safety.
The FAA agrees with the recommendation and has adopted a floor at
4,000 feet MSL in this final rule in order to reduce the potential for
overcrowded airspace along this popular route. This airspace has been
combined with adjacent 4,000' MSL feet floor areas both north and south
of it, forming a large Area D. The new airspace will provide adequate
Class B coverage for Runway 10 departures, and for Runway 28L/R
arrivals during arrival rush periods when aircraft are vectored to
final.
In the eastern section of the ``keyhole'' area, between 20NM and
25NM from SFO VOR/DME, several commenters suggested that the airspace
floor should be designated at 6,000 feet MSL to accommodate hang glider
activity near Mission Ridge, Mt. Alison, and Monument Peak. Many
believed that the proposed 5,000 MSL floor would place
[[Page 36062]]
too many general aviation flights in unsafe close proximity to numerous
Part 103 operators.
The FAA agrees that a higher floor at 6,000 feet MSL in this area
will better serve the needs of both the general aviation community and
the Part 103 operators while simultaneously providing necessary Class B
protection for SFO traffic flows. The area has now been combined with
adjacent 6,000' MSL floor areas to the north and south, forming a large
Area E.
Several commenters suggested that the San Francisco Class B
airspace modification should be designed to accommodate full protection
for Simultaneous Offset Instrument Approach (SOIA) procedures. Concern
was expressed that SOIA operations are anticipated to begin at San
Francisco International Airport in the near future, and there would be
insufficient time to complete another Class B rulemaking action to
include the new procedures in a timely manner. Runway 28L SOIA
operations would require that aircraft be established on final no
closer than 20 miles from the airport, with glideslope intercept at an
altitude lower than the current Class B airspace coverage. It was
suggested that the area from the SFO VOR/DME 107 deg. radial clockwise
to the SFO VOR/DME 167 deg. radial between 20NM and 25NM be lowered to
5,000 feet MSL for protection of anticipated Runway 28L SOIA arrivals.
The FAA acknowledges and appreciates the foresight demonstrated in
the suggestion offered by these commenters. However, in formulating
final rule decisions on regulatory airspace, the FAA cannot legally
impose additional restrictions on access to airspace that would be more
stringent than those originally proposed in the NPRM.
The proposed lowering of the airspace floor in the area surrounding
Half Moon Bay down to a level of 4,000 feet MSL concerned some users
who reported that they accomplish aerobatic training and practice
offshore along the Pacific coast. With the existing class B airspace
floor at 6,000 feet MSL over much of the area, airspace from 5,900 feet
MSL down to 1,500 feet MSL is currently used for teaching, maneuvers
requiring extra vertical space. The commenters on this issue suggested
a few alternative airspace boundary reconfigurations to allow retention
of some airspace available for aerobatic maneuvers.
The FAA has carefully reviewed available airspace options near Half
Moon Bay and finds its necessary to establish a 4,000 feet MSL floor in
the reconfigured Area D. The airspace is required in order to provide
adequate Class B protection for numerous IFR turboprop air taxis
carrying passenger to SFO. These aircraft are regularly vectored
through airspace over Half Moon Bay at 4,000 feet MSL for radar
sequencing into the flow of jets landing at San Francisco. ATC
operational requirements dictate the need for these aircraft to be
descended to 4,000 feet MSL near Half Moon Bay for effective sequencing
into the SFO arrival flow. However, in order to accommodate retention
of aerobatic practice in this area, the proposed Area D has been
slightly modified in this final rule and a new Area K with a 5,000 feet
MSL floor has been designated offshore near the Half Moon Bay airport.
It should also be noted that ten miles of shoreline airspace will
remain available only a few miles south of the current aerobatic
practice area in the vicinity of San Gregorio.
The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA), and some
individual pilots, expressed opposition to the various low altitude
Class B airspace floor levels proposed over the Pacific Ocean because
they were perceived to be barriers that would severely limit access to
Victor Airway 27 (V27) for users wishing to transition northbound or
southbound along the airway.
The FAA acknowledges that V27 penetrates the new SFO Class B Areas
D, E, G, H, J, and K as designated in this final rule. While this could
initially appear to limit access for general aviation, V27 actually
remains an excellent route for VFR flights. Bay Approach personnel
predict that flights requesting VFR transition along V27 at appropriate
VFR altitudes will rarely, if ever, be denied access. It is also
expected that international traffic transitioning to and from the
oceanic environment will no longer need to level off at unnecessary
interim altitudes to avoid uncontrolled traffic on V27. Additional
safety benefits for VFR aircraft will include more efficient avoidance
of heavy jet wake turbulence while under positive air traffic control
and separation from other air traffic. These factors are highly
consistent with FAA's Class B airspace design criteria that specify the
airspace should afford a level of protection appropriate for the large
numbers of aircraft and passengers served in the airspace.
Although fewer than 8 percent of all commenters expressed
opposition to the proposed airspace ceiling at 10,000 feet MSL, the FAA
has nonetheless carefully reconsidered airspace operational
requirements with due regard to all comments received on this issue. A
variety of reasons were cited by commenters for opposing the higher
ceiling. A few commenters felt the higher ceiling could not be
justified without more comprehensive traffic count data covering all
operations between 8,000 and 10,000 feet MSL, or without presentation
of statistical data concerning near-midair collision reports. Some
recommended that the current ceiling should remain unchanged to allow
VFR traffic unrestricted transition access at 8,500 and 9,500 feet MSL
without causing unnecessary frequency congestion or excessive workload
requiring more air traffic controllers. One commenter expressed concern
that the higher ceiling might preclude overflights by some aircraft not
equipped with oxygen. Another said that the proposed ceiling would be
overly restrictive, and that a ceiling at 9,000 feet MSL would be
adequate.
While reports of near midair collisions have not been filed in the
San Francisco area that would explicitly suggest raising the Class B
airspace ceiling, such reports would be neither desirable nor necessary
to justify the FAA's decision. The Class B airspace program is designed
to ensure proactively that specific safety levels within congested
terminal airspace are maintained by designating areas wherein all
aircraft are subject to standardized operating rules and equipment
requirements. The FAA evaluated San Francisco International Airport
operations using criteria specified in FAA Order 7400.2D, Procedures
for Handling Airspace Matters, and with particular attention to the
unique characteristics of air traffic flow in the San Francisco
terminal area. The analysis showed that the existing airspace ceiling
does not provide adequate regulatory airspace protection consistent
with the expectations of the majority of airline passengers and
airspace users. The Class B airspace program was developed to ensure
that specific protection is afforded within the airspace surrounding
high-density commercial airports. Class B airspace operating rules are
deemed to provide the level of protection appropriate for the large
numbers of aircraft and passengers served by this type of airport. The
FAA's thorough analysis of actual airspace utilization within the San
Francisco terminal area included usage of available modeling and
simulation resources at the Airspace Planning and Analysis Division,
ATA-200, Air Traffic Airspace Lab in Herndon, VA. The results of that
analysis, along with review of the original facility staff study
concerning
[[Page 36063]]
this airspace, revealed that all airspace between 8,000 and 10,000 feet
MSL is used on a regular basis by air traffic controllers for the
purpose of handling instrument operations to and from SFO airport. San
Francisco International Airport handled 432,046 total airport
operations during 1998 and 19,079,664 passengers enplaned during the
same time period. These figures continue a trend of significant growth.
Current FAA aviation forecasts for the 1999 to 2010 time period project
that the FAA Western-Pacific Region will lead all other FAA regions
with a rate of growth of aircraft operations increasing 21.6 percent
over the forecast period. Accordingly, this final rule raises the San
Francisco Class B airspace ceiling to 10,000 feet MSL.
The Rule
This amendment to 14 CFR part 71 modified the San Francisco Class B
airspace area. Specifically, this action raises the airspace ceiling
from 8,000 to 10,000 feet MSL; lowers the airspace floor in some areas;
combines and reconfigures several existing areas; and creates three new
areas. Areas A, B, and C remain unchanged from the existing airspace
configuration, except for the new ceiling at 10,000 feet MSL. Area D,
with its floor at 4,000 feet MSL, has been combined with other areas
including the previous Area H, part of previous Areas E and J, and a
new area east of the primary airport. The reconfigured Area E retains
its floor at 6,000 feet MSL, and now includes the previous Area I, a
small corner from the previous Area J, and a new area east of the
primary airport. The only change to the existing Area F is the new
ceiling at 10,000 feet MSL. Area G has been slightly modified into a
simpler arc configuration. Area K has been renamed Area I. A new Area
H, with a floor of 4,000 feet MSL, has been designated over the ocean
to the west of Area G. A new Area J, with a floor of 8,000 feet MSL,
has been designated 25NM to 30NM from the SFO VOR/DME, forming a new
southern and eastern airspace boundary. Lastly, a new Area K, with a
floor of 5,000 feet MSL, has been designated over the ocean to the
southeast of Area G.
The coordinates for this airspace docket are based on North
American Datum 83. Class B airspace areas are published in Paragraph
3000 of FAA Order 7400.9G, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,
dated September 1, 1999, and effective September 16, 1999, which is
incorporated by reference in 14 CFR section 71.1. The Class B airspace
area listed in this document will be published subsequently in the
Order.
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 is modifying the San Francisco Class B airspace area by
raising the ceiling from 8,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) to 10,000 feet
MSL, by combining and reconfiguring the lateral boundaries of several
existing areas, by establishing three new areas, and by lowering base
altitudes. This action will increase the overall size of the Class B
airspace area thereby increasing air traffic control's (ATC) ability to
manage and control air traffic complexity in the San Francisco area.
The FAA contends that this final rule will improve operational
efficiency and enhance aviation safety in the Class B airspace area.
The final modifications will also include clearer boundaries defining
the Class B airspace areas.
The final rule will impose minimal costs on the FAA or airspace
users. Notices will be sent to all pilots within a 100-mile radius of
the San Francisco International Airport (SFO) at a total cost of
$200.00 for postage. Printing of aeronautical charts which reflect the
changes to the Class B airspace area will be accomplished during a
scheduled chart printing, and will result in no additional costs for
plate modification and updating of charts. No staffing changes will be
required to maintain the modified Class B airspace area.
The FAA contends that the final rule will not impose any additional
costs on general aviation aircraft operators. Since the San Francisco
Class B airspace area will reside within the existing Mode C Veil, no
additional avionics equipment will be required for any aircraft
operating in the vicinity of the Class B airspace area. Even with the
establishment of new areas and the expansion of existing areas, VFR
aircraft operators should not have difficulty circumnavigating the
Class B airspace area. Additionally, aircraft operators have the
options of circumnavigating outside the San Francisco VOR/DME 15 NM arc
and operate under the higher floor of 6,000 feet MSL. For those
aircraft operators who choose not to circumnavigate or fly below the
Class B airspace, standard procedures may be used to enter the San
Francisco Class B airspace area.
The FAA has determined that this final rule will be cost-
beneficial. The final rule will generate benefits in the form of
improved flow of air traffic operations into and out of SFO; clearer
airspace boundaries; improved ATC containment of transport aircraft
(containment refers to aircraft operating in controlled airspace and
receiving ATC separation from other aircraft); and reduced potential
for midair collisions in the terminal area.
Initial 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 rational 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
[[Page 36064]]
entities, section 605(b) of the 1980 act provides that the head of the
agency may so certify and an FRA 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 only a minimal
impact on small entities. This determination is based on the premise
that potentially impacted aircraft operators regularly fly into
airports where radar approach control services have been established
such as the SFO Class B airspace area. These operators already have the
required equipment, and, therefore, there will be no additional cost to
these entities. Accordingly, pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility
Act, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), the Federal Aviation Administration certifies
that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
International Trade Impact Statement
The final rule will not constitute a barrier to international
trade, including the export of U.S. goods and services to foreign
countries or the import of foreign goods and services into the United
States.
Federalism Implications
The regulations adopted herein will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, it
is determined that this final rule does not have federalism
implications under E.O. 12612.
Unfunded Mandates Assessment
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (the Act),
enacted as Public Law 104-4 on March 22, 1995, requires each Federal
agency, to the extent permitted by law, to prepare a written assessment
of the effects of any Federal mandate in a proposed or final agency
rule may result in the expenditure of $100 million or more (when
adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year by State, local, and
tribal governments in the aggregate, or by the private sector. Section
204(a) of the Act, 2 U.S.C. 1534(a), requires input by elected officers
(or their designees) of State, local, and tribal governments on a
proposed ``significant intergovernmental mandate.'' A ``significant
intergovernmental mandate'' under the Act is any provision in a Federal
agency regulation that would impose an enforceable duty upon State,
local, and tribal governments in the aggregate of $100 million
(adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year. Section 203 of the
Act, 2 U.S.C. 1533, which supplements section 204(a), provides that,
before establishing any regulatory requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, the agency shall
have developed a plan, which, among other things, must provide for
notice to potentially affected small governments, if any, and for a
meaningful and timely opportunity to provide input in the development
of regulatory proposals.
This final rule does not contain any Federal intergovernmental or
private sector mandates. Therefore, the requirements of Title II of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 do not apply.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule contains no information collection requests requiring
approval of the Office of Management and Budget pursuant to the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)).
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71
Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).
Adoption of the Amendment
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:
PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, CLASS B, CLASS C, CLASS D, AND
CLASS E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIRWAYS; ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR 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]
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9G, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated September 1, 1999, and effective September 16,
1999, is amended as follows:
Paragraph 3000--Subpart B--Class B Airspace
* * * * *
AWP CA B San Francisco, CA
San Francisco International (SFO) Airport (Primary Airport)
(lat. 37 deg.37'09"N., long. 122 deg.22'30"W.).
San Francisco (SFO) VOR/DME
(lat. 37 deg.37'10"N., long. 122 deg.22'26"W.)
Oakland (OAK) VORTAC
(lat. 37 deg.43'33"N., long. 122 deg.13'25"W.)
Sausalito (SAU) VORTAC
(lat. 37 deg.51'19"N., long. 122 deg.31'22"W.)
Boundaries
Area A. That airspace extending upward from the surface to and
including 10,000 feet MSL within a 7-mile radius of the San
Francisco (SFO) VOR/DME extending clockwise from the SFO VOR/DME
247 deg. radial to the SFO VOR/DME 127 deg. radial, and within a 5-
mile radius of the SFO VOR/DME between the SFO VOR/DME 127 deg.
radial clockwise to SFO VOR/DME 247 deg. radial, excluding that
airspace within a 3-mile radius of the Oakland VORTAC and excluding
that airspace west of the Pacific coast shoreline.
Area B. That airspace extending upward from 1,500 feet MSL to
and including 10,000 feet MSL bounded on the northwest by a 5-mile
radius arc of the SFO VOR/DME, on the southeast by a 10-mile radius
arc of the SFO VOR/DME, on the northeast by the SFO VOR/DME 107 deg.
radial, and on the southwest by the SFO VOR 137 deg. radial
excluding that airspace within Area A.
Area C. That airspace extending upward from 2,500 feet MSL to
and including 10,000 feet MSL bounded on the northwest by a 10-mile
radius arc of the SFO VOR/DME, on the southeast by a 15-mile radius
arc of the SFO VOR/DME, on the northeast by the SFO VOR/DME 107 deg.
radial and on the southwest by the SFO VOR/DME 137 deg. radial.
Area D. That airspace extending upward from 4,000 feet MSL to
and including 10,000 feet MSL, bounded by a line beginning at the 5-
mile DME point on the SFO VOR/DME 137 deg. radial thence southeast
along the SFO VOR/DME 137 deg. radial to and counterclockwise along
the 15-mile DME arc of the SFO VOR/DME to and northwest along the
Oakland VORTAC 305 deg. radial to and northeast along the Sausalito
VORTAC 052 deg. radial to and clockwise along the 20-mile DME arc of
the SFO VOR/DME to and northwest along the SFO VOR/DME 167 deg.
radial to and clockwise along the 15-mile DME arc of the SFO VOR/DME
to and northeast along the SFO VOR/DME 247 deg. radial to and
counterclockwise along the 5-mile DME arc of the SFO VOR/DME to the
point of beginning, excluding that airspace within Area K.
Area E. That airspace extending upward from 6,000 feet MSL to
and including 10,000 feet MSL bounded by a line beginning at the 15-
mile DME point on the SFO VOR/DME 277 deg. radial thence
counterclockwise along the 15-mile DME arc of the SFO VOR/DME to and
southeast along the SFO VOR/DME 167 deg. radical to and
counterclockwise along the 20-mile DME arc of the SFO VOR/DME to and
northeast along the Sausalito VORTAC 052 deg. radial, to and
clockwise along the 25-mile DME arc of the SFO VOR/DME to and
northeast along the SFO VOR/DME 227 deg. radial to and clockwise
along the 20-mile DME arc to and northeast along the SFO VOR/DME
277 deg. radial to the point of beginning.
Area F. That airspace extending upward from 2,100 feet MSL to
and including 10,000 feet MSL bounded by a line beginning at the
[[Page 36065]]
10-mile DME point on the SFO VOR/DME 247 deg. radial thence
clockwise along the 10-mile DME arc to and west along the SFO VOR/
DME 107 deg. radial to and counterclockwise along the 7-mile DME arc
of the SFO VOR/DME to and clockwise along the 3-mile DME arc of the
Oakland VORTAC to and counterclockwise along the 7-mile DME arc of
the SFO VOR/DME to and southwest along the SFO VOR/DME 247 deg.
radial to the point of beginning.
Area G. That airspace extending upward from 3,000 feet MSL to
and including 10,000 feet MSL between the 10- and 15-mile radii of
the SFO VOR/DME from the SFO VOR/DME 247 deg. radial clockwise to
the SFO VOR/DME 107 deg. radial.
Area H. That airspace extending upward from 4,000 feet MSL to
and including 10,000 feet MSL between the 15- and 20-mile radii of
the SFO VOR/DME from the SFO VOR/DME 277 deg. radial clockwise to
the SFO VOR/DME 317 deg. radial.
Area I. That airspace extending upward from 1,500 feet MSL to
and including 10,000 feet MSL bounded on the west by a 7-mile radius
arc of the SFO VOR/DME and on the east by the Pacific coast
shoreline.
Area J. That airspace extending upward from 8,000 feet MSL to
and including 10,000 feet MSL between the 25- and 30-mile radii of
the SFO VOR/DME from the SFO VOR/DME 082 deg. radial clockwise to
the SFO VOR/DME 227 deg. radial.
Area K. That airspace extending upward from 5,000 feet MSL to
and including 10,000 feet MSL between the 10- and 15-mile radii of
the SFO VOR/DME from the SFO VOR/DME 217 deg. radial clockwise to
the SFO VOR/DME 247 deg. radial.
* * * * *
Issued in Washington, DC, on May 30, 2000.
Reginald C. Matthews,
Manager, Airspace and Rules Division.
Note: The following Appendix will not appear in the Code of
Federal Regulations.
Appendix--San Francisco Class B Airspace Area.
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
[[Page 36066]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07JN00.000
[FR Doc. 00-14046 Filed 6-6-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-C