# Presentation: 932193

## Developing Standard Instrument Approach Procedures

- Presentation to: 2006 FAA Partnership Conference
- By:
- Ron Sanders, Manager, Fort Worth Flight Procedures Office
- Rodney Clark, Texas Airports Development Office
- Date: March 29, 2006

## Some things about IAPs

- How do I request the development of an instrument approach for my airport?
- How are those approach minimums established?
- Why does it take so long for the process?

## How to request an IAP

- Requests are received from Airport Managers’ or Pilots - A Pilot request is coordinated with the Airport Manager.
- The request can be made via the internet at “avn.faa.gov” or through written request to our office.

## http://avn.faa.gov/index.asp?xml=ifp/index

## How We Process the Request

- Data is gathered and this is prioritized by the Regional Airspace Procedures Team (more commonly referred to as the RAPT).
- The RAPT establishes a priority for the project and a publication date is agreed upon.- This publication date may be over a year out based on priorities of all projects received.

## RAPT Priorities

- Priority 1 - Safety, anything to correct a  known safety deficiency
- Priority 2 - Newly installed or relocated NAVAIDs or airport runway addition/change
- Priority 3 - Procedures which test or implement an FAA initiative
- Priority 4 - Procedures at airports with no existing IFR approach
- Priority 5 - Procedures providing a reduction in minima
- Priority 6 - Procedures which eliminate the requirement for a waiver or NOTAM
- Priority 7 - Procedures providing flow improvement
- Priority 8 - Procedures providing other benefits, new criteria compliance
- Priority 9 - Public use procedures not included in 1 through 8
- Priority 10 - Special and private procedures not providing benefits of 1 thru 8

## Other Actions for IAP Development

- Envirornmental determinations are made- This is through an EIS, EA, or an evaluation to determine if the procedure would be “Categorically Excluded”.
- Coordination takes place with Airports Division to determine the airport meets standards established in AC 150/5300-13- The Airport must meet Airport Design criteria- Obstruction Surveys must be completed- Weather sources must be determined- Communications at the airport must be available.

## Other Actions for IAP Development

- The Air Traffic facility is queried for their desires on design for the procedure.- Typically we query what altitude would be good for communication at the IAF and where would they like them to go in the event of a missed approach.
- Once all of these actions have taken place then the request is forwarded for development.

## How are Minima Established

- Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS) directives provide us the guidance on establishing minima for each type of approach. (Reference FAAH 8260.3B & 8260.19C)
- Typically minima are driven by the obstacle and the lighting environment that you have at your airport.

## How are Minima Established

- Clearance from obstacles are established with Required Obstacle Clearance  (ROC)- The ROC varies with the type approach being developed but Non-Precision IAPs vary from 250ft to 350ft.
- Lighting is mentioned as minima may be lowered with certain approach lighting.

## Validation of Minima

- Validation comes from Flight Check Aircraft.- Flight checked satisfactorily (SAT) then on to publication.- Flight checked unsatisfactorily (UNSAT), then changes/ corrections must occur or procedure will not go forward for publication.

## Why does it take so Long?

- The process is well coordinated.
- Safety is major concern and drives some of the necessary delays.
- Your priority versus National Objectives.
- When requesting try to state your case for some priority consideration.

## Recent Changes to the Advisory Circulars

- AC 150/5070-6B, Airport Master Plans, dated July 29, 2005
- New ALP requirements defined in Appendix “F”
- 150/5300-13, Change 9, dated September 26, 2005
- Runway End Siting Requirements (Appendix 2)
- The glidepath angle and threshold crossing height can be altered instead of displacing the threshold.
- A combination of threshold displacement and altering the glidepath angle and threshold crossing height may also be used.
- Must have FAA approval before implementation.
- Glidepath Qualification Surface
- Departure Surface, only dependent upon whether or not instrument departures are being used or planned for that RW end.
- No longer have the three year moratorium to light/mark penetrations to avoid displacing the threshold.

## SIAP

- FAA Uses for the ALP
- Aeronautical studies of proposed construction, on and near the airport.
- Designation of land needed for aeronautical purposes and uses
- Siting of FAA facilities (ATCT’s, NAVAIDS, radar, etc.)
- Development of new and amended instrument approach and departure procedures.

## SIAP

- Questions about the Category of surface to be used for category of aircraft.
- TERPS Information Letter (TIL) dated March 2, 2003
- Letter dated February 17, 2004
- Washington interpretation of Appendix 2 dated October 28, 2005
- Category 1 through 5, are for Category A and B aircraft.
- Category C, D and E aircraft must meet Category 6 or greater in Appendix 2.

## SIAP

- Penetrations to the TSS can be mitigated using one of the following actions.
- The object is removed or lowered to preclude the applicable TSS.
- The threshold is displaced.
- The GPA/TCH are modified or a combination of threshold displacement and GPA/TCH can be used (with FAA approval).
- Visibility minimums are raised.
- Night operations are prohibited unless the obstruction is lighted or an approved VGSI is used.
- A separate airspace study for each “stick” is submitted for review and potential approval by the Flight Standards Office.

## SIAP

- New Instrument Approach Procedures result from:
- New Airport Projects
- New airports
- Runway extensions
- Threshold displacements
- Overlays
- Facilities and Equipment Projects
- State Requests
- Sponsor requests

## SIAP

*Most important mainstream*
*In any town.”*
*-Norm Crabtree*

**SIAP**

- March 30, 2005: Meeting with the FTW FPO
- The purpose of this meeting and resultant agreement is to ensure that all parties work within a planned schedule to ensure construction projects coincide with required revisions to instrument flight procedures.
- Timeline was identified highlighting the critical dates for the submission of information, to reduce the likelihood that airports will suffer loss of instrument access as a result of planned infrastructure changes.

## SIAP

- 18 Months Prior to the Planned Completion Date (PCD)
- Sponsor files a 7460-1 for planning purposes with the FAA.
- FAA Airports will initiate a Non-Rulemaking Action (NRA)
- The FPO will provide the basic IFR impact.
- If the planned project WILL NOT result in changes to the runway: length, width, threshold or touchdown zone elevations, or ARP; i.e, resurfacing project, then the FPO action will be limited to the appropriate IFR impact NOTAMS  per construction start date.

## SIAP

- 14 Months prior to the Planned Completion Date (PCD)
- Sponsor will make a request by memo to the FAA and provide construction plans and phasing/work schedule and if necessary a revised PCD.
- The FPO will provide development project in production schedule based upon the PCD. This now becomes the estimated chart date (ECD).
- Sponsor will provide planned airfield data changes to the ADO.

## SIAP

- 14 Months prior to the Planned Completion Date (PCD), cont’d
- Sponsor submits Request package to the ADO, which includes the FAA Airport Data and Design Forms

## SIAP

- 14 Months prior to the Planned Completion Date (PCD), cont’d
- Airport Design Form is based upon Appendix 16, from AC 1505300-13
- Standards for:
- ALP
- RW Length
- RW Markings
- Hold Position Signs and Markings
- RW Lighting
- Parallel TW
- Approach Lights
- Threshold Siting Surface
- Obstruction Surveys

## SIAP

- 14 Months prior to the Planned Completion Date (PCD), cont’d
- Airport Data Form
- Identifies all changes that will occur based upon the proposed project.

## SIAP

- 14 Months prior to the Planned Completion Date (PCD), cont’d
- Survey, from NGS or third party completed on the Instrument Data Survey Form

## SIAP

- 14 Months prior to the Planned Completion Date (PCD), cont’d
- Up-to Date Airport Layout Plan

## SIAP

- 12 Months Prior to the Estimated Completion Date
- TxADO will provide to the FPO and NFDC the finalized airport engineering report data to be used in instrument procedure devlopment/amendment.
- FPO will review data to ensure it meets the procedures criteria requirements.
- Construction tolerances – TERPS, Volume 3, Chapter 2, Paragrapgh 2.1

## SIAP

- 284 Days (Approximately 9 1⁄2 Months)
- FPO will complete the feasibility work and forward project development to the National Flight Procedures Office to meet the ECD.
- The data being used will be considered “final.”
- Any changes may result in a change to the proposed publication date.

## SIAP

- Five Days prior to beginning construction
- FPO is notified so that FDC NOTAMS identified in the NRA study 18 months earlier, can be prepared and issued on the provided start date and time.
- During construction, the FPO must be notified of any changes to the schedule or data so the FPO can determine if there is an impact to the ECD.
- Six Weeks prior to the ECD
- The FPO must be notified to identify if the project is or is not on target for the planned completion so the charting instructions can be finalized.
- Estimated Completion Date, New or revised instrument procedures are charted concurrent with reconfigured runway.

## FAA Website:www.faa.gov