15028 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 53 / Friday, March 18, 2011 / Notices 

Average minutes per response: 30. 

Burden hours: 2,500,000. 

Current Actions: New collection of 

information. 

Type of Review: New collection. 

Affected Public: Individuals and 

households, businesses and 

organizations, State, Local or Tribal 

Government. 

Average Expected Annual Number of 

Activities: 125. 

Respondents: 1,604,168. 

Annual responses: 1,604,168 

responses. 

Frequency of Response: Once per 

request. 

Average minutes per response: 

5.46545 minutes. 

Burden hours: 146,125 hours. 

An agency may not conduct or 

sponsor, and a person is not required to 

respond to, a collection of information 

unless it displays a currently valid OMB 

control number. 

Dated: March 15, 2011. 

Faye Lipsky, 

Reports Clearance Officer, Center for Reports 

Clearance, Social Security Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2011–6452 Filed 3–17–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4191–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

[Public Notice: 7371] 

Office of the Chief of Protocol; Gifts to 

Federal Employees From Foreign 

Government Sources Reported by 

Employing Agencies in Calendar Year 

2009; Correction 

AGENCY: Department of State. 

ACTION: Notice; Correction. 

SUMMARY: The Department of State 

published a document in the Federal 

Register of January 18, 2011 concerning 

Gifts to Federal Employees from Foreign 

Government Sources Reported to 

Employing Agencies in Calendar Year 

2009. The document contained the 

incorrect title of a foreign dignitary. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

David Solomon, Office of the Chief of 

Protocol (202) 647–1333/ 

Solomonda@State.gov. 

Correction 

In the Federal Register of January 18, 

2011 in FR Vol. 76, No. 11, page 2983, 

in the third entry in the third column 

under ‘‘Identity of foreign donor and 

government’’, the title of the President of 

the Constitutional Court of Korea is 

incorrect and should be changed from 

‘‘President Kang-Kook Lee, 

Constitutional Court of Korea, 

Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’’ 

to read: ‘‘President Kang-Kook Lee, 

Constitutional Court of Korea, Republic 

of Korea’’. 

Dated: March 14, 2011. 

Patrick F. Kennedy, 

Under Secretary for Management, 

Department of State. 

[FR Doc. 2011–6457 Filed 3–17–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4710–10–P 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

[Public Notice: 7324] 

Advisory Committee on International 

Postal and Delivery Services 

AGENCY: Department of State. 

ACTION: Notice; FACA Committee 

meeting announcement. 

SUMMARY: As required by the Federal 

Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 

92–463, the Department of State gives 

notice of a meeting of the Advisory 

Committee on International Postal and 

Delivery Services. This Committee has 

been formed in fulfillment of the 

provisions of the 2006 Postal 

Accountability and Enhancement Act 

(Pub. L. 109–435) and in accordance 

with the Federal Advisory Committee 

Act. 

DATES: April 7, 2011 from 2 p.m. to 

about 5 p.m. (open to the public). 

Location: The American Institute of 

Architects (Boardroom), 1735 New York 

Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20006. 

Meeting agenda: The agenda of the 

meeting will include a review of the 

results of the October 2010 UPU Council 

of Administration, the major issues to 

arise at the April 2011 UPU Postal 

Operations Council and other subjects 

related to international postal and 

delivery services of interest to Advisory 

Committee members and the public. 

Public input: Any member of the 

public interested in providing public 

input to the meeting should contact Mr. 

Mohammed Nauage, whose contact 

information is listed below. Each 

individual providing oral input is 

requested to limit his or her comments 

to five minutes. Requests to be added to 

the speaker list must be received in 

writing (letter, e-mail or fax) prior to the 

close of business on March 31, 2011; 

written comments from members of the 

public for distribution at this meeting 

must reach Mr. Nauage by letter, e-mail 

or fax by this same date. A member of 

the public requesting reasonable 

accommodation should make the 

request to Mr. Nauage by that same date. 

For further information, please 

contact Mohammed Nauage, Office of 

Global Systems (IO/GS), Bureau of 

International Organization Affairs, U.S. 

Department of State, at (202) 647–1044, 

NauageM@state.gov. 

Dated: February 18, 2011. 

Dennis M. Delehanty, 

Foreign Affairs Officer, Department of State. 

[FR Doc. 2011–6454 Filed 3–17–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4710–19–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–0831] 

Airport Improvement Program (AIP): 

Interim Policy Regarding Access to 

Airports From Residential Property 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA). 

ACTION: Interim policy; amendment to 

sponsor grant assurance 5. 

SUMMARY: This action adopts an interim 

policy amending and clarifying FAA 

policy concerning through-the-fence 

access to a federally-obligated airport 

from an adjacent or nearby property, 

when that property is used as a 

residence, and permits continuation of 

existing access subject to certain 

standards. This action also modifies 

sponsor grant assurance 5, Preserving 

Rights and Powers, to prohibit new 

residential through-the-fence access to a 

federally-obligated airport. Prior FAA 

policy discouraged through-the-fence 

access to a federally-obligated airport 

from an off-airport residence. Owners of 

properties used both as a residence and 

for the storage of personal aircraft, 

sometimes called ‘‘hangar homes,’’ had 

urged the agency to permit an exception 

to the through-the-fence policy for 

residents who own aircraft. 

At this time, the FAA is adopting an 

interim policy. The policy review 

conducted in 2010 highlighted a 

number of differences among the 

airports identified as having residential 

through-the-fence arrangements. As a 

result, the FAA believes it will take 

more time and more detailed 

information to better understand these 

arrangements and how they impact each 

airport sponsor’s ability to comply with 

its grant assurances. However, the 

agency also acknowledges that 

interested stakeholders have a more 

immediate need for resolution. The goal 

of the interim policy is to strike a 

careful balance by accommodating 

residential through-the-fence access 

where it already exists. 

To date, the FAA has not been able to 

clearly define the specific criteria or 


Emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 53 / Friday, March 18, 2011 / Notices 15029 

requirements that would allow airport 

sponsors to enter into new residential 

through-the-fence arrangements while 

ensuring ongoing compliance with their 

grant obligations. Therefore, the interim 

policy requires airports with existing 

residential through-the-fence 

arrangements to develop access plans 

outlining how the airport sponsor meets 

certain standards for control of airport 

operations and development and for 

self-sustaining and nondiscriminatory 

airport rates. 

In adopting this interim policy, the 

FAA is announcing its intent to initiate 

another policy review of residential 

through-the-fence access to federallyobligated airports in 2014. This 

timeframe will give the FAA the 

experience it needs in reviewing 

residential through-the-fence 

arrangements via the access plans and 

understanding how to mitigate the real 

and potential adverse effects of these 

arrangements. Additionally, it will 

allow the agency to complete a separate, 

ongoing general aviation airport study 

that is analyzing the federally assisted 

general aviation airport system. 

The interim policy adopts the changes 

proposed to sponsor grant assurance 5, 

Preserving Rights and Powers, to 

prohibit new residential through-thefence access to a federally-obligated 

airport. However, it is the agency’s 

intent to reconsider this change as part 

of the policy review that will be 

conducted in 2014. In the interest of 

obtaining all available information 

relevant to the review, the FAA invites 

any person who would be interested in 

a specific approval of new residential 

through-the-fence access at a federallyobligated airport to contact the FAA 

Airport Compliance Division to discuss 

the particular circumstances so this can 

be considered in our 2014 review. 

DATES: The effective date of this interim 

policy and the amendment to the grant 

assurance is March 18, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Randall S. Fiertz, Director, Office of 

Airport Compliance and Field 

Operations, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591, 

telephone (202) 267–3085; facsimile: 

(202) 267–5257. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Availability of Documents 

You can get an electronic copy of this 

policy and all other documents in this 

docket using the Internet by: 

(1) Searching the Federal 

eRulemaking portal (http:// 

www.regulations.gov/search); 

(2) Visiting the FAA’s Regulations and 

Policies Web page at http:// 

www.faa.gov/regulations_policies; or 

(3) Accessing the Government 

Printing Office’s Web page at http:// 

www.gpoaccess.gov/index.html. 

You can also get a copy by sending a 

request to the Federal Aviation 

Administration, Office of Airport 

Compliance and Field Operations, 800 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20591, or by calling 

(202) 267–3085. Make sure to identify 

the docket number, notice number, or 

amendment number of this proceeding. 

Authority for the Interim Policy and 

Grant Assurance Modification 

This notice is published under the 

authority described in subtitle VII, part 

B, chapter 471, sections 47107 and 

47122 of Title 49, United States Code. 

Background 

Sponsors of airports that accept 

planning and development grants from 

the FAA under the Airport 

Improvement Program (AIP), 49 U.S.C. 

47101 et seq., agree to a list of standard 

conditions, or grant assurances. Similar 

obligations also attach to the transfer of 

federal surplus property to airport 

sponsors and are often contained in 

surplus property deeds. These include 

responsibilities to retain the rights and 

powers necessary to control and operate 

the airport; to maintain the airport in a 

safe condition; to take reasonable steps 

to restrict land adjacent to the airport to 

compatible land uses; to allow access to 

the airport on terms that are reasonable 

and not unjustly discriminatory to any 

category of user; and to maintain a rate 

structure for airport fees that makes the 

airport as self-sustaining as possible. 

A complete list of the current grant 

assurances can be viewed at: http:// 

www.faa.gov/airports/aip/ 

grant_assurances/. 

Administration of the AIP, including 

sponsor compliance with grant 

assurances, is the responsibility of the 

FAA Associate Administrator for 

Airports. The Airport Compliance 

Manual, FAA Order 5190.6B, issued on 

September 30, 2009, contains policy 

guidance for agency employees 

monitoring sponsor compliance with 

the grant assurances. 

Agency guidance that preceded Order 

5190.6B discouraged through-the-fence 

access at airports with grant obligations, 

and Order 5190.6B contained specific 

objections to residential through-thefence access based on more recent 

agency experiences. Typically, throughthe-fence access allows an aircraft 

owner to store an aircraft at an offairport property, and to use the airport 

by way of a taxiway that crosses the 

airport boundary and connects the 

owner’s property or neighborhood to the 

airport’s runway-taxiway system. 

The Notice of Proposed Policy 

Following review of written 

comments, meetings with state aviation 

officials, visits to airports with 

residential through-the-fence access, 

listening sessions with homeowners and 

homeowners’ associations, and 

discussions with aviation membership 

associations, the FAA published a 

proposed revision in agency policy on 

residential through-the-fence access for 

public comment in September 2010: 

Airport Improvement Program (AIP): 

Policy Regarding Access to Airports 

From Residential Property (75 FR 54946; 

September 9, 2010). That notice 

contained a background history of the 

residential through-the-fence access 

issue, and addressed the comments the 

agency had received prior to issuing the 

proposed policy. 

Comments Received on the Notice 

The agency received more than 75 

comments on the proposed policy, 

including comments from members of 

Congress, state aviation agencies, 

industry associations, and private 

homeowners with current through-thefence access to an airport. Most 

commenters supported not only the 

continuation of existing residential 

through-the-fence uses, but also the 

accommodation of new access 

arrangements in the future. While 

commenters supporting residential 

through-the-fence access were often 

critical of the FAA’s continuing concern 

about such access, many of these 

commenters also expressed appreciation 

that the proposed policy would allow 

virtually all existing residential throughthe-fence access to continue. The 

National Air Transportation Association 

commented in support of the proposed 

policy, and described it as striking the 

right balance between future needs of 

airports and existing residential 

through-the-fence access. 

As a preliminary matter, some 

commenters apparently assumed that 

the FAA objected to all residential 

through-the-fence access, at any airport. 

On the contrary, the interim policy 

relates only to residential through-thefence access at airports that receive 

taxpayer funds through FAA grants. The 

FAA has no objection whatsoever to the 

development of private airparks, where 

property owners can manage and 

operate the airport in any manner they 

like, without federal assistance. 

In recent years, the FAA has 

identified cases in which residential 


Emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
15030 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 53 / Friday, March 18, 2011 / Notices 

through-the-fence access arrangements 

at federally-obligated airports resulted 

in an airport sponsor’s inability to meet 

specific grant assurance obligations. In 

working with airport sponsors to correct 

their grant assurance violations, the 

FAA has found these arrangements 

impose long-term limitations on the 

airport and compromise the airport’s 

ability to retain the inherent features 

expected of public use airports. 

The question for the FAA, therefore, 

is not whether to allow hangar homes 

next to airports, but whether to use 

public funds to support airports with 

hangar homes. Over time, some of these 

airports may function more as private 

airparks than as public-use airports 

available to all users as part of a 

national system of airports. The 

standards for compliance adopted in 

this interim policy are not regulations; 

rather, they are mitigations needed to 

address the sponsor’s ongoing ability to 

meet its obligations. The FAA considers 

these mitigations necessary to fulfill its 

obligation to assure that grant funds are 

used for the legal purposes for which 

these funds are authorized and 

appropriated, and that taxpayer dollars 

are used in the manner that will have 

the most benefit for the national airport 

system and its users. 

Many of the comments supportive of 

residential through-the-fence access 

were similar to comments received in 

the FAA’s outreach efforts in the past 

year, and repeated arguments that were 

summarized and addressed in the 

preamble to the proposed policy 

published on September 9, 2010. For 

example, these comments typically 

asserted benefits from residential 

through-the-fence access, including the 

presence of a supportive airport 

community; a source of income and 

aviation activity the airport would not 

otherwise have; and improved security 

resulting from constant observation of 

the airport by close neighbors. Some 

commenters argued that residents who 

own aircraft on adjacent property 

should not be covered by the same 

policies that apply to residential land 

use generally. Some commenters also 

reiterated that a decision on residential 

through-the-fence access should be left 

to the local community. The agency 

believes these particular comments were 

addressed in the notice of proposed 

policy, and the agency’s position 

remains the same on these points. 

Approval of New Residential Throughthe-Fence Access 

A substantial number of comments 

criticized the proposed prohibition on 

approval of new residential through-thefence arrangements. The FAA 

understands that future residential 

through-the-fence access could be 

controlled, to a great extent, by making 

any approval conditional upon the 

airport operator taking any steps the 

FAA considers necessary to mitigate 

potential problems with that access. 

Accordingly, we would agree that many 

of the issues experienced with existing 

locations could be avoided. However, as 

the FAA stated in the notice, the agency 

has continuing concerns about the 

existence of residential properties on 

the airport boundary. First, it is virtually 

impossible to assure that these 

properties will not be used as residences 

by non-aircraft owners at some point. 

Second, even residents who now own 

aircraft and use the airport may still not 

be supportive of changes in the airport 

that result in more noise or night 

operations, or changes in airport 

boundaries. Also, federal law and policy 

make no distinction between residents 

that own aircraft and those that do not. 

As a result, approval of hangar homes 

next to an airport makes it more difficult 

for the FAA and airport operators to 

oppose other residential communities 

near an airport, which are the primary 

source of incompatible land use 

encroachment at airports nationally. 

Finally, homeowners have an 

expectation of perpetual title to their 

homes to retain the value of their 

investment, to obtain financing on a 

long-term schedule, and to simply avoid 

being uprooted from their residence. As 

a result, residential through-the-fence 

uses are typically very difficult for the 

airport operator to relocate or terminate 

if the need arises. There is no option of 

allowing new residential through-thefence access on a trial basis; if it is 

allowed, it will probably be there as 

long as the airport. As noted in the 

summary, the interim policy is designed 

to help the FAA better understand 

possible ways to reconcile these issues. 

The Experimental Aircraft 

Association (EAA) submitted detailed 

comments supporting approval of new 

residential through-the-fence locations, 

including several points not raised in 

earlier comments. EAA commented that 

the FAA does not have the authority to 

amend the grant assurances; however, 

that authority does exist, at 49 U.S.C. 

47107(h), and the agency has fully 

complied with the requirements of that 

statute. EAA also stated that it had done 

a survey of ten airports in Georgia, and 

found no available hangars. That fact 

could argue for through-the-fence access 

to off-airport hangars, if there were some 

reason the hangars could not be built 

on-airport, but it does not support the 

need for hangar homes. Residential use, 

not the storage of aircraft, is the issue. 

Through-the-fence access to private 

hangars at general aviation airports is 

not generally a compliance issue, and is 

not the subject of this interim policy. 

EAA offered specific criteria for FAA 

approval of individual new projects, in 

lieu of the general prohibition proposed 

in the interim policy, similar to the 

standards proposed in the notice for 

assuring compliance at existing 

residential through-the-fence locations. 

The criteria suggested by the FAA are 

intended to mitigate the adverse impacts 

that arise from residential through-thefence arrangements. They may not 

necessarily allow an airport sponsor to 

eliminate these impacts, and EAA did 

not identify any new methods to ensure 

that these arrangements do not 

compromise the public-use features of 

the airport. 

Accordingly, as an interim measure, 

the FAA is adopting the proposed 

general policy against approval of new 

residential through-the-fence access at 

this time, and is revising AIP grant 

assurance 5, Preserving Rights and 

Powers, as proposed. However, the 

agency also accepts that both the agency 

and airport operators will learn more 

about the effects of residential throughthe-fence access at airports as airports 

with existing access develop access 

plans and FAA staff has the opportunity 

to review and approve a substantial 

number of those plans. The FAA 

recently initiated a study of general 

aviation airports to better understand 

how these airports are utilized and the 

roles they serve in the national airport 

system. EAA, in its comments, 

recommended that the FAA study 

general aviation airport capacity 

through a new Future Airport Capacity 

Task (FACT) study. The FAA’s current 

review of the public-use general 

aviation airport system is not 

technically a successor to the most 

recent FACT study (FACT 2). This study 

recognizes the diversity that exists 

within the general aviation airport 

community, and it will develop detailed 

data about the roles, operations, and 

profiles of these facilities to provide 

more useful information about our 

current airport system. While we believe 

that the majority of airports with 

existing residential through-the-fence 

arrangements fall within a category of 

less than 50,000 operations and less 

than 50 based aircraft, other 

characteristics that may better define 

their role locally and nationally are less 

transparent. As a result of these efforts, 

the agency expects to have reliable 

information on the utilization of 

federally assisted general aviation 

airports, and also on the ability of the 


Emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 53 / Friday, March 18, 2011 / Notices 15031 

access plans to resolve potential 

compliance issues at airports with 

residential through-the-fence access. On 

that basis, it is the agency’s intent to 

initiate a review of this interim policy 

in fiscal year 2014. 

Existing Residential Through-the-Fence 

Locations 

As with comments received before the 

proposed policy was issued, most 

commenters supported FAA’s proposal 

to allow existing residential throughthe-fence access to continue, with less 

restrictions and oversight than proposed 

by the FAA in the notice. Some 

commenters supported the FAA’s 

proposal to allow through-the-fence 

access where it exists, if the airport can 

meet certain standards, and not allow 

new access. Several commenters 

opposed allowing even the existing uses 

to continue, and urged the eventual 

elimination of the residential throughthe-fence access at federally-obligated 

airports. For reasons discussed in the 

notice, the FAA believes it is neither 

feasible nor necessary to eliminate 

existing residential through-the-fence 

arrangements. The FAA’s proposed 

alternative (having these airports take 

certain actions to mitigate the adverse 

effects of through-the-fence access) 

should be adequate to protect the 

government’s investment in these 

airports in most cases and avoids 

unnecessary hardship on current 

property owners. 

In addition to existing and new 

residential through-the-fence access, 

many commenters had specific 

comments on what if anything should 

be required of airport operators and 

residents at existing residential throughthe-fence locations, and if new 

standards do apply, what the FAA’s 

approval process should involve. The 

FAA found these comments very useful 

in developing the interim policy 

statement. 

Comments not previously addressed 

in the notice of proposed policy can be 

summarized as follows: 

Comment: The FAA should do a caseby-case review of new requests for 

residential through-the-fence access, 

rather than prohibit new access, because 

of the different conditions at each 

airport. 

Response: The interim policy adopted 

toward existing uses does allow agency 

staff to take full account of the 

individual conditions at each airport. 

The interim policy provides certain 

general minimum standards of 

compliance for safety, cost recovery and 

efficient operation of these airports, for 

evaluation of each airport’s 

circumstances. As the FAA explained in 

the introduction to comments on new 

access in this notice, the agency does 

not believe that the mitigation of 

existing conditions is a reason to create 

new through-the-fence uses, given the 

inherent problems with residential use 

next to an airport, and the fact that 

residential use tends to be permanent 

once established. However, the FAA 

intends to review the issue of approval 

of new residential through-the-fence 

access in fiscal year 2014, after 

experience with individual airport 

access plans and completion of an FAA 

study on general aviation airports now 

in progress. In the interest of obtaining 

all available information relevant to that 

review, the FAA invites any person who 

would be interested in a specific 

approval of new residential through-thefence access at a federally-obligated 

airport in the future to contact the FAA 

Airport Compliance Division to discuss 

the particular circumstances so it can be 

considered as part of the FAA’s 2014 

review. 

Comment: Residential through-thefence access could be approved at new 

locations if the airport agreed to 

additional safety regulations, such as 

prohibitions on commercial flights, 

charter flights, and flight training. 

Response: This is exactly the kind of 

limitation on airport use that the interim 

policy is intended to avoid. An airport 

that receives taxpayer assistance for its 

role in the national system should not 

have limits on aviation use just so that 

residences can be located adjacent to the 

airport. 

Comment: EAA proposed, as part of a 

request that FAA allow new residential 

through-the-fence access, that each 

airport with that access develop a safety 

management system (SMS). 

Response: The FAA supports the 

adoption of SMS at airports, and the 

agency has recently issued a notice of 

proposed rulemaking proposing to 

require SMS at airports with 14 CFR 

part 139 certification, Safety 

Management System for Certificated 

Airports (75 FR 62008, October 7, 2010). 

However, the agency does not believe 

that it is necessary or appropriate to 

adopt a special requirement for SMS, as 

a condition of AIP grants, at airports 

with through-the-fence access. First, 

although safety issues are one of the 

potential problems with residential 

through-the-fence access, the FAA is not 

aware of broad evidence that such 

airports are necessarily more prone to 

specific safety problems. Second, the 

SMS process involves costs for airport 

sponsors and staff time for both 

sponsors and the FAA. A requirement 

for an SMS plan at all such airports 

would be an unjustified expense and 

administrative burden on sponsors of 

many small airports that have no 

unresolved safety issues at this time. 

The FAA would encourage any general 

aviation operator to consider an SMS 

program, but is not making SMS a 

condition of approval of residential 

through-the-fence access at this time. 

Comment: All NAS users pay into 

funds through fuel taxes and should not 

have to pay additional fees. Paying 

property taxes and airport fees is 

‘‘double taxation.’’ 

Response: Grant-assisted airports are 

required to be as self-sufficient as 

possible and develop rate structures that 

fully support the capital and operating 

expenses of the airport. While fuel taxes 

go to fund AIP grants that assist with 

capital projects, AIP grants are not 

available to pay for an airport’s 

operating and maintenance expenses. 

Local and state property taxes, even 

taxes collected on hangars built on 

airports by tenants, go to support 

general local government expenses, and 

may not contribute anything to the 

airport. Most airports rely almost 

exclusively on rent and fees from 

tenants and users to cover their 

operating and maintenance expenses. A 

through-the-fence user who does not 

pay a fee for access may not be 

contributing any revenue to the airport 

itself, even though the user has special 

access to a valuable asset in the airfield. 

Comment: The owner of a hangar 

home with through-the-fence access 

should not have to pay the same amount 

an on-airport hangar tenant pays for rent 

of the hangar, since that rent includes 

the capital costs of providing that 

hangar. 

Response: While airport sponsors can 

establish their own rate-setting 

methodology for access through the 

fence, the methodology used must be 

consistent with the sponsor’s grant 

assurance obligations. In other words, 

the methodology should provide for 

recovery of costs and ensure fairness to 

airport tenants and users. The FAA has 

included several examples of fees that 

would accomplish the general goals of 

recovering costs and fairly distributing 

costs among airport users. The example 

related to hangar rent has been revised 

to make clear the amount represents an 

access fee based on the ground rental 

rate, and not the full rental for lease of 

an on-airport hangar. 

Comment: The notice used three 

different references to cost recovery, 

which made it unclear how much 

airport sponsors are expected to recover 

from through-the-fence users. 

Response: The preamble to the policy 

summarizes standards for through-thefence access that include recovery of 


Emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
15032 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 53 / Friday, March 18, 2011 / Notices 

airport operating costs. That standard 

states the airport can collect, and does 

collect, fees from through-the-fence 

users that are comparable to those 

charged to airport tenants so that all 

users bear a fair proportion of airport 

costs. That is an accurate statement of 

the agency’s general policy goal for 

through-the-fence charges. The specific 

list of standards the FAA expects to be 

included in a sponsor’s access plan 

includes more specific guidance on 

various fees that could be used to 

accomplish this goal, but the two 

statements both state the same 

principles of recovery of airport costs 

and fairness to airport tenants and users. 

However, nothing in the interim policy 

precludes an airport sponsor from 

establishing a higher rate for its throughthe-fence users. 

Comment: The compliance standards 

stated in the proposed policy address 

situations that are not common at 

airports with through-the-fence access. 

These conditions addressed by the 

standards are also found at airports that 

do not have through-the-fence access, 

where they have no effect on 

compliance. 

Response: Each of the standards listed 

for inclusion in an airport’s access plan 

is based on experience with conditions 

at airports with residential through-thefence access. If the condition addressed 

by a particular standard does not apply 

at an airport (for example, the airport 

already recovers airport costs from both 

tenants and off-airport users), then the 

sponsor would be required to do no 

more than document that fact in the 

access plan. 

Comment: The effective date of the 

policy should be the date of publication 

of the final policy, and not September 

9, 2010. 

Response: The effective date of the 

interim policy adopted is March 18, 

2011. However, the definition of 

‘‘existing access’’ retains the status date 

of September 9, 2010, the first date that 

the public was on notice of the FAA’s 

intended policy. Retaining the 

September 9, 2010 date in the definition 

simply prevents an attempt to establish 

new residential through-the-fence 

access in the brief period between 

publication of the notice and 

publication of this interim policy. 

Comment: The proposed policy on 

‘‘additional’’ access provided that a 

change or extension of new access 

would be effective for 20 years. First, 

that is a disincentive for through-thefence users to agree to changes in access 

that improve airport operation and 

safety; if the owner’s current access 

rights are longer than 20 years. The 

developer of a through-the-fence 

residential project at an obligated 

general aviation airport in Sandpoint, 

Idaho, is willing to agree to relocation 

of its access taxiway to improve airport 

safety, but only if its current perpetual 

access rights transfer to the new 

configuration. Other commenters noted 

that the 20-year extension is not enough 

to amortize a standard residential 

mortgage of 30 years. 

Response: The FAA agrees that the 

proposed definition of ‘‘additional 

access’’ and the 20-year limitation 

would have had some unintended 

effects. The interim policy adopted 

combines extensions and renewals of 

access into the single definition of 

‘‘extend an access.’’ The interim policy 

makes clear that a change that serves to 

improve airport safety or implement the 

sponsor’s long-term planning decisions 

will not be considered an ‘‘extend an 

access.’’ In this case, the 20-year limit on 

access extensions will not apply, and 

whatever rights of access the owner has 

in the current access location may 

transfer to the new access location. 

On the second point, the FAA does 

not believe the 20-year limit on 

extension of access would be a 

hardship. First, many extensions of 

access would not involve financing or 

refinancing at all. Second, homeowners 

with significantly shorter access terms, 

such as one year, have obtained 

financing for construction. This is also 

a reasonable timeframe for airport 

sponsors as airport planning is typically 

based on a 20-year forecast and 

planning horizon. 

Comment: Revisions to the airport 

layout plan (ALP) and access plans 

required by the policy should be eligible 

for AIP planning grants. 

Response: By law, AIP funds may 

only be used for airport development 

projects, planning associated with 

airport development, and noise, air, and 

water quality mitigation. As a result, 

FAA Order 5100.38C, Airport 

Improvement Program Handbook, states 

that AIP grants may fund updates to an 

ALP when the update is done as part of 

an airport’s master plan study or update. 

Airport master plans routinely identify 

adjacent land uses to determine what, if 

any, constraints they might have on an 

airport’s development. Therefore, the 

work items associated with an airport 

sponsor’s implementation of the interim 

policy are directly related to airport 

master planning which is eligible for 

AIP grant funding. Airport sponsors 

should work with FAA Airports District 

Office (ADO) and regional division staff 

to develop an appropriate scope of work 

for their master plan. However, airport 

sponsors that choose to undertake these 

work items outside of a master planning 

process will need to fund them through 

local means. 

Comment: Some commenters 

expressed concern that the definition of 

‘‘existing access’’ may be too narrow. For 

example, how will the FAA address a 

situation in which a property owner 

develops a lot adjacent to an airport, but 

residential through-the-fence access is 

not currently being used and has not 

been formally granted by the airport 

sponsor. The policy should permit the 

airport sponsor to grant those property 

owners residential through-the-fence 

access. 

Response: Based on the limited 

information provided, the future access 

through the fence described in the 

comment would not be permitted under 

the interim policy if the property is used 

as a residence. This scenario does not 

meet the definition of ‘‘existing access’’. 

However, the airport sponsor will have 

the opportunity to demonstrate how its 

specific situation meets the definition of 

‘‘existing access’’ as stated in the interim 

policy. The FAA notes that the interim 

policy would not prevent the owner 

from requesting that the sponsor permit 

through-the-fence access for a hangar on 

the property if the property is not being 

used as a residence. Additionally, this is 

an interim policy and is subject to 

review. As stated in the introduction of 

the interim policy, FAA invites any 

person who would be interested in a 

specific approval of new residential 

through-the-fence access at a federallyobligated airport to contact the FAA 

Airport Compliance Division to discuss 

the particular circumstances so this can 

be considered in our 2014 review. 

Comment: If the FAA considers 

removing an airport from the National 

Plan of Integrated Airport Systems 

(NPIAS), that consideration should be 

based on the general criteria for 

inclusion in the NPIAS, and not simply 

the fact that the airport has not met the 

special standards included in the policy 

for residential through-the-fence access. 

Response: The FAA agrees with the 

comment. While failure to meet the 

compliance standards will trigger an 

FAA review of whether it is appropriate 

to retain an airport in the NPIAS, and 

possibly a compliance action, the final 

decision on whether to remove an 

airport from the NPIAS will take into 

account all of the criteria for inclusion 

in the NPIAS. 

Comment: The policy does not 

address on-airport housing. Existing onairport housing should be subject to the 

same policy as off-airport properties 

with through-the-fence access, and the 

FAA should not consider the airport in 

noncompliance if the airport meets the 


Emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 53 / Friday, March 18, 2011 / Notices 15033 

listed standards for through-the-fence 

access. 

Response: Airport property is not a 

safe or appropriate location for a 

residence. However, the FAA will 

review individual existing situations as 

necessary, to determine if special 

circumstances exist that make it 

appropriate to apply the criteria for 

through-the-fence residential use to onairport housing. 

Comment: The policy should make 

clear that FAA is not softening its 

position on commercial through-thefence access. 

Response: The interim policy on 

residential through-the-fence access 

does not affect the agency’s policy on 

through-the-fence access from property 

used for commercial purposes. Throughthe-fence access for any reason is 

generally discouraged, particularly from 

property used to provide aviation 

services. However, the FAA 

understands that there may be reasons 

for access to property used for aircraft 

storage or an owner’s business, without 

the potential problems or permanent 

rights associated with residential use. 

Accordingly, a sponsor’s permission for 

through-the-fence access for commercial 

purposes is not, in itself, considered a 

violation of the grant assurances. The 

FAA cautions that any attempts to 

convert commercial through-the-fence 

access into a residential arrangement is 

inconsistent with this interim policy 

and could result in a violation of 

sponsor assurance 5 as amended by this 

interim policy. 

Comment: It is not necessary for the 

FAA to consult the Transportation 

Security Administration (TSA) when 

reviewing access plans. 

Response: The FAA lacks the 

expertise to determine what impact, 

positive or negative, through-the-fence 

residential access may have on airports 

with regard to security. The TSA did not 

express any preference for residential 

use of land near the airport in our 

consultation with them in 2010. As 

noted in the proposed policy, the TSA 

plans to undertake its own review, and 

the FAA will review and consider any 

recommendations that may follow. In 

the interim, the FAA may consult the 

TSA as part of its review of the access 

plans. 

Comment: The proposed policy is 

inconsistent with Homeland Security 

Presidential Directive 16 and its 

supporting Domestic Outreach Plan. 

Response: The TSA did not raise any 

concerns related to this specific 

directive or any others when the FAA 

consulted with their staff in the spring 

of 2010. However, the FAA will forward 

these concerns to the TSA for further 

evaluation. 

Discussion of FAA Clarifications 

Interim Policy 

In reviewing the comments, the FAA 

determined that it will take more time 

and more detailed information to better 

understand how residential through-thefence arrangements impact a sponsor’s 

ability to comply with its grant 

assurances and whether or not specific 

criteria can be developed to ensure a 

sponsor’s ongoing compliance with its 

assurances. Therefore, the FAA is 

adopting an interim policy and will 

initiate a policy review in 2014. 

Changes: All references to the policy 

now clarify that it is an interim 

measure. 

Applicability 

In reviewing the proposed policy, the 

FAA determined that the scope 

identified for applicability was too 

narrow. The scope has been broadened 

to include federally-obligated airports 

where new residential-through-thefence access is proposed. The FAA’s 

implementation of the policy will 

require all federally-obligated airports to 

certify their status with regard to the 

policy. 

Changes: The interim policy clarifies 

this statement to read, ‘‘this interim 

Policy applies to all federally-obligated 

airports, including those with existing 

residential through-the-fence access or 

proposing to establish new residential 

through-the-fence access.’’ Additionally, 

the interim policy states that all 

federally-obligated airports will be 

required to certify their status with 

regard to the policy. 

Applicability—‘‘Additional Throughthe-Fence Access’’ 

In reviewing the comments, the FAA 

recognized the unintentional confusion 

created by the use of this term. The 

proposed policy defined ‘‘additional 

through-the-fence access’’ to capture two 

specific circumstances: an airport 

sponsor’s ability to permit a new access 

point and extension or renewal of access 

agreements at airports with existing 

residential through-the-fence 

arrangements. Upon further review, 

given the clear, specific conditions used 

to define ‘‘existing access,’’ it is not 

necessary to contemplate new points of 

entry for the residential through-thefence users covered by the interim 

policy at this time. 

Changes: The interim policy replaces 

this term with a definition for ‘‘extend 

an access’’ and deletes references to the 

development of new access points. 

Applicability—‘‘Development’’ 

In reviewing the comments, the FAA 

recognized this term was vague. The 

interim policy offers a refined definition 

to better specify residential 

development. 

Changes: The interim policy amends 

this definition to specify the excavation 

or grading of land needed to construct 

a residential property or construction of 

a residence. 

Applicability—‘‘Residential Property’’ 

Some comments noted that the 

proposed policy lacked a clear 

definition of ‘‘residential property’’. The 

interim policy defines this term. 

Changes: The interim policy defines 

residential property as a piece of real 

property used for single- or multi-family 

dwellings; duplexes; apartments; 

primary or secondary residences even 

when co-located with a hangar, 

aeronautical facility, or business; 

hangars that incorporate living quarters 

for permanent or long-term use; and 

time-share hangars with living quarters 

for variable occupancy of any term. 

Section I. Existing Through-the-Fence 

Access From Residential Property at 

Federally-Obligated Airports 

In reviewing the proposed policy, the 

FAA found many of the statements in 

this section to be duplicative of 

statements made in the preamble. The 

interim policy incorporates these 

statements by reference to the proposed 

policy. 

Changes: The two subsections have 

been combined and shortened to 

succinctly summarize the interim 

policy. 

Relocation of Access Points 

One comment noted that holders of 

through-the-fence access rights would 

be discouraged from relocating their 

access point if that relocation triggered 

a higher level of review or potentially 

diminished their legal rights. The 

interim policy adopts the change 

proposed in the comments. 

Changes: Section II of the interim 

policy allows the relocation of throughthe-fence access points to be considered 

as ‘‘existing access’’ when the access 

point is relocated to improve the 

airport’s overall safety or better address 

issues associated with the sponsor’s 

long-term planning needs. The interim 

policy clarifies that the first access point 

must be removed, and this provision is 

not intended to be used to create new 

access points. 


Emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
15034 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 53 / Friday, March 18, 2011 / Notices 

Section III. Standards for Compliance at 

Airports Proposing Additional Throughthe-Fence Access at Airports Covered by 

This Policy 

The title and text of this section has 

been changed to reflect the FAA’s 

decision to replace the term ‘‘additional 

through-the-fence access’’ with ‘‘extend 

an access’’. Additionally, some of the 

language has been re-worded to better 

reflect FAA’s intent to review these 

proposals carefully. 

Changes: Section III of the interim 

policy is now titled, ‘‘Standards for 

compliance at airports proposing to 

extend through-the-fence access’’. 

Similar changes have been made 

throughout the text of the interim 

policy, and the requirements applicable 

to new access points have been deleted. 

This section clearly states the FAA’s 

intent to review proposals to extend 

residential through-the-fence access 

carefully. 

Access Fee Methodology 

In reviewing the comments, the FAA 

found that the phrasing used to describe 

various fee methodologies was 

confusing. The interim policy revises 

this phrasing to clarify that residential 

through-the-fence access fees should, at 

a minimum, be equivalent to the ground 

rental rate for on-airport tie-downs and 

hangars. Additionally, the FAA 

identified two other potential 

methodologies that could be used to set 

rates for through-the-fence access. 

Changes: Section III has been revised 

to better specify various methodologies 

that may be used to establish throughthe-fence access fees, and adds two 

methodologies not included in the 

notice of proposed policy. 

Section III. Standards for Compliance at 

Airports Proposing To Extend Throughthe-Fence Access 

In reviewing the proposed policy, the 

FAA broadened the scope of some 

considerations to better capture the 

potential for an airport’s growth and/or 

the use of new aircraft at that airport 

over time. Other changes were 

incorporated to better protect the 

sponsor’s rights and powers. 

Changes: Section III is revised to 

better clarify: 

• Sponsors should obtain perpetual 

avigation easements for overflight. 

• Residential through-the-fence users 

acknowledge that their property will be 

affected by aircraft noise, emissions, and 

operations that may change over time. 

• Residential through-the-fence users 

waive any right to bring an action 

against the airport sponsor for existing 

and future operations and activities at 

the airport. 

• The airport sponsor has a 

mechanism for requiring a residential 

through-the-fence user to comply with 

the FAA’s determination with regard to 

FAA Form 7460–1, Notice of Proposed 

Construction or Alteration. 

In reviewing the proposed policy, the 

FAA identified three additional criteria 

it will consider when an airport sponsor 

proposes to extend existing through-thefence access. Consistent with other 

changes made to the interim policy, one 

reference to new access points has been 

deleted. 

Changes: Section III has been revised 

to delete the reference to additional 

access and include the additional 

considerations: 

• The sponsor has a mechanism for 

ensuring residents with through-thefence access do not create or permit 

conditions or engage in practices that 

could result in airport hazards, 

including wildlife attractants. 

• The access agreement is 

subordinate to the sponsor’s current and 

all future grant assurances. 

• The airport sponsor has developed 

a process for educating residents with 

through-the-fence access about their 

rights and responsibilities. 

Section IV. Process and Documentation 

Some comments questioned the 

process and timeline for how the FAA 

will review residential through-thefence access plans. To address this, the 

interim policy now states that the FAA 

will establish implementation guidance 

in the form of a Compliance Guidance 

Letter available on the FAA’s Web site 

at http://www.faa.gov/airports. 

Changes: Section IV references the 

forthcoming Compliance Guidance 

Letter on FAA Implementation of 

Interim Policy on Residential Throughthe-Fence and Review of Access Plans. 

The interim policy encourages airport 

sponsors to review this Compliance 

Guidance Letter that will be available on 

the FAA’s Web site at www.faa.gov/ 

airports. 

In reviewing the proposed policy, the 

FAA re-worded some of the language in 

Section IV to better clarify that airport 

sponsors should provide residential 

through-the-fence access plans. 

Changes: A sentence in Section IV has 

been re-worded to more clearly convey 

airport sponsors’ responsibility to 

provide residential through-the-fence 

access plans. 

In reviewing the proposed policy, the 

FAA re-evaluated its proposal to require 

airport sponsors with existing 

residential through-the-fence 

arrangements to initiate a formal airport 

layout plan (ALP) revision after the FAA 

accepts their access plan. The FAA 

believes that the sponsor’s pen and ink 

change should be sufficient to provide 

the information needed. Thus, the 

interim policy provides a more flexible 

approach and allows the airport sponsor 

to undertake this task on its own 

schedule as part of its planning process. 

Changes: Section IV no longer 

requires airport sponsors to initiate a 

formal ALP revision within three years 

from the date their access plan is 

accepted. Instead, the airport sponsor 

will be expected to complete a formal 

ALP revision that fully depicts the 

scope of the existing residential 

through-the-fence arrangements the next 

time the sponsor initiates an airport 

master plan study or update. 

In reviewing the proposed policy, the 

FAA found it was vague with regard to 

when an airport sponsor would need to 

re-evaluate its access plan. The interim 

policy clarifies that the FAA’s 

acceptance of an access plan represents 

an agency determination, as opposed to 

a finding, that the airport sponsor has 

met the compliance standards for 

existing residential through-the-fence 

access for a period not to exceed 20 

years. 

Changes: The interim policy notes 

that the FAA will make a determination, 

which is more consistent with other 

actions made by the FAA Airport 

Compliance Division. It is also more 

specific with regard to the frequency at 

which sponsors will need to update 

their residential through-the-fence 

access plans. The interim policy 

identifies four events which would 

trigger an update of the access plans. 

Those events include: development of a 

new master plan, significant updates to 

an ALP, requests for federal 

participation in land acquisition, or any 

changes to the access agreement. 

In reviewing the proposed policy, the 

FAA determined that language used to 

describe airports serving a function in 

the NPIAS, but unable to meet the 

standard of compliance, should be 

revised. The interim policy states that 

the FAA will consider the constraints 

placed on the utility of the airport to be 

a significant factor. 

Changes: The interim policy has been 

revised to state, ‘‘The sponsor will not 

lose eligibility for entitlement grants on 

the basis of through-the-fence access, 

but the FAA will have to consider the 

constraints on the utility of the airport 

as a significant factor in AIP funding 

decisions.’’ 

In reviewing the proposed policy, the 

FAA revised the language used to 

describe airports that no longer have 

significant value in the national system. 

The interim policy states the FAA will 

address cases in which the residential 


Emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 53 / Friday, March 18, 2011 / Notices 15035 

through-the-fence access cannot be 

reasonably mitigated through the 

development of an access plan and the 

use of that access adversely affects the 

airport’s public use characteristics. 

Changes: The interim policy has been 

revised to clarify the FAA will consider 

removing an airport from the NPIAS if 

residential through-the-fence access 

cannot be reasonably mitigated through 

development of an access plan and the 

use of that access affects the airport’s 

public use characteristics. 

In reviewing the proposed policy, the 

FAA found it was vague in its treatment 

of airport sponsors with existing 

residential through-the-fence access that 

fail to submit an access plan. The 

interim policy explains that failure to 

submit an access plan may jeopardize 

an airport sponsor’s ability to compete 

for AIP grant funding beginning in 

Fiscal Year 2013. 

Changes: The interim policy adds 

paragraph 6.c. to Section IV. This 

paragraph discusses the FAA’s 

expectation that airports with existing 

residential through-the-fence access will 

develop appropriate access plans. 

Failure to do so may jeopardize an 

airport sponsor’s AIP eligibility 

beginning in Fiscal Year 2013. 

In reviewing this section, the FAA 

replaced all references to requests for 

‘‘additional’’ residential through-thefence access to ‘‘extend’’ residential 

through-the-fence access. The FAA also 

deleted any requirements that would be 

necessitated by a new access point. 

Changes: Paragraph B of Section IV is 

titled ‘‘Requests to extend residential 

through-the-fence access at airports 

covered by this interim Policy’’. Similar 

changes have been made throughout 

this section, and references to new 

access points have been deleted. The 

interim policy also deletes the 

requirement that sponsors submit a 

revised ALP depicting any new access 

points. 

In reviewing the requirements for 

sponsors proposing to extend residential 

through-the-fence access, the FAA 

refined its intent with regard to master 

plans. The interim policy specifies that 

airport sponsors should work with FAA 

staff to develop an appropriate scope of 

work for their master plan. 

Changes: The paragraph describing 

the master plan requirements directs 

airport sponsors to work with the FAA 

ADO or regional division staff to 

develop an appropriate scope of work 

for their master plan. 

Section V. Eligibility for AIP grants 

In reviewing the proposed policy, the 

FAA found it was not clear in its 

explanation of future AIP eligibility and 

how the Agency will evaluate requests 

to fund public infrastructure and 

facilities that provide substantial benefit 

to private through-the-fence users. The 

proposed policy states the FAA will 

reduce its investment in such projects; 

however, the FAA will consider the 

constraints on the utility of the airport 

and determine if the project is 

sufficiently justified before making an 

investment decision. 

Changes: The interim policy states the 

FAA will have to consider the 

constraints on the utility of the airport 

as a significant factor in AIP funding 

decisions. It also more clearly explains 

that the FAA may not be able to justify 

the federal investment in projects that 

result in substantial benefit to 

residential through-the-fence users. 

Amendment to Grant Assurance 5 

In reviewing the proposed policy, the 

FAA found many of the statements in 

this section to be duplicative of 

statements made in the preamble. The 

interim policy deletes these statements. 

Changes: The description of item 2 

has been shortened to succinctly 

summarize the interim policy. 

1. Interim Policy on Existing Throughthe-Fence Access From a Residential 

Property 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration adopts 

the following interim Policy on existing 

through-the-fence access to a federallyobligated airport from residential 

property: 

Interim Policy on Existing Through-theFence Access to Airports from A 

Residential Property 

Applicability 

This interim Policy applies to all 

federally-obligated airports, including 

those with existing residential throughthe-fence access or proposing to 

establish new residential through-thefence access. All federally-obligated 

airports will be required to certify their 

status with regard to this policy. 

For the purposes of this interim 

Policy statement: 

In this sense ‘‘access’’ means: 

1. An access point for taxiing aircraft 

across the airport boundary; or 

2. The right of the owner of a 

particular off-airport residential 

property to use an airport access point 

to taxi an aircraft between the airport 

and that property. 

‘‘Existing access’’ through the fence is 

defined as any through-the-fence access 

that meets one or more of the following 

conditions: 

1. There was a legal right of access 

from the property to the airport (e.g., by 

easement or contract) in existence as of 

September 9, 2010; or 

2. There was development of the 

property prior to September 9, 2010, in 

reliance on the airport sponsor’s 

permission for through-the-fence aircraft 

access to the airport; or 

3. The through-the-fence access is 

shown on an FAA-approved airport 

layout plan (ALP) or has otherwise been 

approved by the FAA in writing, and 

the owner of the property has used that 

access prior to September 9, 2010. 

‘‘Extend an access’’ is defined as an 

airport sponsor’s consent to renew or 

extend an existing right to access the 

airport from residential property or 

property zoned for residential use, for a 

specific duration of time, not to exceed 

20 years. 

‘‘Development’’ is defined as 

excavation or grading of land needed to 

construct a residential property; or 

construction of a residence. 

‘‘Residential property’’ is defined as a 

piece of real property used for single- or 

multi-family dwellings; duplexes; 

apartments; primary or secondary 

residences even when co-located with a 

hangar, aeronautical facility, or 

business; hangars that incorporate living 

quarters for permanent or long-term use; 

and time-share hangars with living 

quarters for variable occupancy of any 

term. 

‘‘Transfer of access’’ through the fence 

is defined as one of the following 

transactions: 

1. Sale or transfer of a residential 

property or property zoned for 

residential use with existing throughthe-fence access; or 

2. Subdivision, development, or sale 

as individual lots of a residential 

property or property zoned for 

residential use with existing throughthe-fence access. 

I. Existing Through-the-Fence Access 

From Residential Property at FederallyObligated airports 

The agency understands that it may 

not be practical or even possible to 

terminate through-the-fence access at 

many of those airports where that access 

already exists. Where access could be 

terminated, property owners have 

claimed that termination could have 

substantial adverse effects on their 

property value and investment, and 

airport sponsors seeking to terminate 

this access could be exposed to costly 

lawsuits. Accordingly, the FAA will not 

consider the existence of existing 

residential through-the-fence access by 

itself to be in noncompliance with the 

airport sponsor’s grant assurances. 

In some cases, the FAA has found that 

through-the-fence access rights can 


Emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
15036 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 53 / Friday, March 18, 2011 / Notices 

interfere with the sponsor’s ability to 

meet its obligations as sponsor of a 

federally assisted public use airport. 

This is discussed in detail at 75 FR 

54946, 54948 (Sept. 9, 2010). As a 

result, the FAA believes that sponsors 

with existing through-the-fence access 

arrangements must adopt measures to 

substantially mitigate the potential 

problems with residential through-thefence access where it exists to avoid 

future grant compliance issues. 

Therefore, the FAA, as a condition of 

continuing grants to airports with 

residential through-the-fence access, 

will require that sponsors adopt the 

measures to substantially mitigate the 

potential problems with residential 

through-the-fence access to avoid future 

grant compliance issues. 

Accordingly, the sponsor of an airport 

where residential through-the-fence 

access or access rights already exist will 

be considered in compliance with its 

grant assurances if the airport depicts 

the access on its airport layout plan 

(ALP) and meets certain standards for 

safety, efficiency, ability to generate 

revenue to recover airport costs, and 

mitigation of potential noncompatible 

land uses. Those standards are listed in 

section II, Standards for compliance at 

airports with existing through-the-fence 

access. The FAA’s review of those 

standards will be detailed in a 

Compliance Guidance Letter which will 

be issued concurrently and published 

on the FAA’s Web site at www.faa.gov/ 

airports. An airport sponsor covered by 

this interim Policy must seek FAA 

approval before entering into any 

arrangement that would extend 

(including renewal of access) throughthe-fence access. Sponsors are reminded 

that nearby homeowners possess no 

right to taxi aircraft across the airport’s 

property boundary, and no off-airport 

property owner will have standing to 

file a formal complaint under 14 CFR 

Part 16 with the FAA to challenge the 

sponsor’s decision not to permit such 

access. 

II. Standards for Compliance at Airports 

with Existing Through-the-Fence Access 

The FAA understands that 

municipally-owned airports have 

varying degrees of zoning authority. For 

example, one airport sponsor may have 

strong zoning powers, while another 

may have none. Also, the nature of 

existing through-the-fence rights can 

greatly affect the sponsor’s ability to 

implement measures to control access. 

Accordingly, the FAA does not expect 

every airport with existing residential 

through-the-fence access to adopt a 

uniform set of rules and measures to 

mitigate that access. However, the FAA 

does expect each such sponsor to adopt 

reasonable rules and implement 

measures that accomplish the following 

standards for compliance, to the fullest 

extent feasible for that sponsor. In 

general, the greater the number of 

residential through-the-fence access 

points and users of the airport and the 

higher the number of aircraft operations, 

the more important it is to have formal 

measures in effect to ensure the sponsor 

retains its proprietary powers and 

mitigates adverse effects on the airport. 

The FAA’s standards for compliance 

for any sponsor of an airport with 

existing residential through-the-fence 

access are as follows: 

1. General authority for control of 

airport land and access. The airport 

sponsor has sufficient control of access 

points and operations across airport 

boundaries to maintain safe operations, 

and to make changes in airport land use 

to meet future needs. 

2. Safety of airport operations. By 

rule, or by agreement with the sponsor, 

through-the-fence users are obligated to 

comply with the airport’s rules and 

standards. 

3. Recovery of costs of operating the 

airport. The airport sponsor can and 

does collect fees from through-the-fence 

users comparable to those charged to 

airport tenants, so that through-thefence users bear a fair proportion of 

airport costs. 

4. Protection of airport airspace. 

Operations at the airport will not be 

affected by hangars and residences on 

the airport boundary, at present or in 

the future. 

5. Compatible land uses around the 

airport. The potential for noncompatible 

land use adjacent to the airport 

boundary is minimized consistent with 

grant assurance 21, Compatible Land 

Use. 

These standards will be applied, on a 

case-by-case basis, in the FAA’s 

evaluation of whether each airport with 

existing residential through-the-fence 

access meets the above requirements to 

the fullest extent feasible for that 

airport. In situations when access can be 

legally transferred from one owner to 

another without the airport sponsor’s 

review, the FAA will treat the access as 

existing. Because the ability of some 

sponsors to control access has been 

compromised as a result of legal rights 

previously granted to through-the-fence 

users, existing access locations may be 

evaluated under the alternative criteria 

for some standards as indicated below, 

if applicable to that airport. 

In some cases, an airport sponsor may 

seek to relocate an existing access point. 

If the sponsor can demonstrate that this 

action will improve the airport’s overall 

safety or better address issues associated 

with the sponsor’s long-term planning 

needs, the FAA will not consider the 

access rights associated with the 

replacement access point to extend an 

access. In order to transfer the terms of 

the existing access point to a new access 

point without a change in compliance 

status, the former existing access point 

must be removed. Such requests should 

be coordinated with the FAA Airports 

District Office (ADO) or Regional 

Airports Division and clearly depicted 

on the sponsor’s ALP. 

III. Standards for Compliance at 

Airports Proposing to Extend Throughthe-Fence Access 

Once allowed, residential throughthe-fence access is very difficult to 

change or eliminate in the future. This 

is because residential owners, more so 

than commercial interests, typically 

expect that their residential property 

will remain suitable for residential use 

and protected from adverse effects for a 

long time. Residential buyers and their 

mortgage lenders may ensure that the 

property is purchased with rights that 

guarantee no change in the access to the 

airport for decades, or indefinitely. 

Because each additional residential 

through-the-fence access location 

introduces the potential for problems for 

the airport in the future, and because 

this access is effectively permanent and 

resistant to change once permitted, the 

FAA will review extensions of existing 

residential through-the-fence access at 

public use airports carefully. 

The following supplemental 

standards will be applied to the FAA’s 

case-by-case review of sponsors’ 

proposals to extend residential throughthe-fence access. In situations when the 

transfer of access from one owner to 

another requires the airport sponsor’s 

concurrence, the FAA will treat the 

access as an extension. The FAA will 

not approve requests to extend access 

that are inconsistent with the sponsor’s 

grant assurances (excluding grant 

assurance 5, Preserving Rights and 

Powers, paragraph ‘‘g’’ as amended by 

this notice). Furthermore, the sponsor 

will be required to demonstrate the 

following standards for compliance: 

• The term of the access does not 

exceed 20 years. 

• The sponsor provides a current 

(developed or revised within the last 

five years) airport master plan 

identifying adequate areas for growth 

that are not affected by the existence of 

through-the-fence access rights, or the 

sponsor has a process for amending or 

terminating existing through-the-fence 

access in order to acquire land that may 


Emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 53 / Friday, March 18, 2011 / Notices 15037 

be necessary for expansion of the airport 

in the future. 

• The sponsor will impose and 

enforce safety and operating rules on 

through-the-fence residents utilizing 

this access while on the airport identical 

to those imposed on airport tenants and 

transient users. 

• The sponsor will charge throughthe-fence residents utilizing this access 

fees that recover airport costs and fairly 

distribute the burden of airport fees 

across all airport users, to both tenants 

and through-the-fence users. Rates 

should increase on the same schedule as 

tenant fees. Fees that may be sufficient 

for this purpose include, without 

limitation: 

Æ Fees equal to tenant tie-down 

charges. 

Æ A fee that is based on the 

methodology used to establish tenant 

rates for land rental on the airport, e.g., 

25 cents per square foot. 

Æ Ground leases for dedicated 

taxiway connections to off-airport 

properties. 

Æ Assessment of capital costs for 

general infrastructure. 

Æ A local tax assessment or levy on 

off-airport aircraft owners that is 

dedicated to airport’s account. 

Æ Any methodology that reflects 

the high value of through-the-fence 

access. 

• Through-the-fence residents will 

bear all the costs of infrastructure, 

including snow removal and 

maintenance, related to this access. 

• Through-the-fence residents 

utilizing this access will grant the 

sponsor a perpetual avigation easement 

for overflight, including unobstructed 

flight through the airspace necessary for 

takeoff and landing at the airport. 

• Through-the-fence residents 

utilizing this access, by avigation 

easement; deed covenants, conditions or 

restrictions; or other agreement, have 

acknowledged that the property will be 

affected by aircraft noise and emissions 

and that aircraft noise and emissions 

may change over time. 

• Through-the-fence residents 

utilizing this access have waived any 

right to bring an action against the 

airport sponsor for existing and future 

operations and activities at the airport 

associated with aircraft noise and 

emissions. 

• The sponsor has a mechanism for 

ensuring through-the-fence residents 

utilizing this access will file FAA Form 

7460–1, Notice of Proposed 

Construction or Alteration, if necessary 

and complying with the FAA’s 

determination related to the review of 

Form 7460–1. 

• The sponsor has a mechanism for 

ensuring through-the-fence residents do 

not create or permit conditions or 

engage in practices that could result in 

airport hazards, including wildlife 

attractants. 

• Where available, the airport sponsor 

or other local government has in effect 

measures to limit future use and 

ownership of the through-the-fence 

properties to aviation-related uses (in 

this case, hangar homes), such as 

through zoning or mandatory deed 

restrictions. The FAA recognizes this 

measure may not be available to the 

airport sponsor in all states and 

jurisdictions. 

• If the residential community has 

adopted restrictions on owners for the 

benefit of the airport (such as a 

commitment not to complain about 

aircraft noise), those restrictions are 

enforceable by the airport sponsor as a 

third-party beneficiary, and may not be 

cancelled without cause by the 

community association. 

• The access agreement is 

subordinate to the sponsor’s current and 

all future grant assurances. 

• The airport sponsor has developed 

a process for educating through-thefence residents about their rights and 

responsibilities. 

IV. Process and Documentation 

A. Existing residential through-thefence access. 

1. General. The sponsor of an airport 

with existing residential through-thefence access will be considered in 

compliance with its grant assurances, 

and eligible for future grants, if the FAA 

determines that the airport meets the 

applicable standards listed above under 

Standards for compliance at airports 

with existing residential through-thefence access. The sponsor may 

demonstrate that it meets these 

standards by providing the ADO or 

regional division staff with a written 

description of the sponsor’s authority 

and the controls in effect at the airport 

(‘‘residential through-the-fence access 

plan’’ or ‘‘access plan’’). Airport sponsors 

are encouraged to review the FAA’s 

Compliance Guidance Letter on FAA 

Implementation and Review of 

Residential-Through-Fence Access 

Arrangements, which will be issued 

concurrently, prior to submitting their 

access plan. This guidance letter will be 

published on the FAA’s Web site at 

http://www.faa.gov/airports. The ADO 

or regional division will review each 

access plan, on a case-by-case basis, to 

confirm that it addresses how the 

sponsor meets each of these standards at 

its airport. The ADO or regional division 

will forward its recommendations 

regarding each access plan to the 

Manager of Airport Compliance. Only 

the Manager may accept an airport 

sponsor’s residential through-the-fence 

access plan. In reviewing the access 

plan, the Manager may consult with the 

Transportation Security Administration 

(TSA). The FAA will take into account 

the powers of local government in each 

state, and other particular circumstances 

at each airport. In every case, however, 

the access plan must address each of the 

basic requirements listed under section 

II of this interim Policy. 

2. Residential through-the-fence 

access plan. The FAA will require 

evidence of compliance before issuing 

an AIP grant, beginning in Fiscal Year 

2013. FY 2013 and later grants will 

include a special grant condition 

requiring the ongoing implementation of 

these access plans. Generally, the FAA 

will not award discretionary grants to 

the airport until the FAA accepts the 

sponsor’s access plan as meeting the 

standards to the extent feasible for that 

airport. Therefore, airport sponsors 

should provide a residential throughthe-fence access plan no later than the 

October 1st of the fiscal year in which 

the sponsor will request an AIP grant 

(i.e., sponsors that will request an AIP 

grant in Fiscal Year 2013 must submit 

an access plan no later than October 1, 

2012; sponsors requesting an AIP grant 

in Fiscal Year 2014 must submit no later 

than October 1, 2013). 

3. Airport Layout Plan. The FAA will 

require all residential through-the-fence 

access points to be identified on the 

airport’s layout plan. A temporary 

designation may be added through a 

sponsor’s pen and ink change to 

immediately identify the locations on 

the airport property that serve as points 

of access for off-airport residents. A 

formal ALP revision that fully depicts 

the scope of the existing residential 

through-the-fence arrangements should 

be completed the next time the airport 

sponsor initiates an airport master plan 

study or update. 

A sponsor’s failure to depict all 

residential through-the-fence access 

points may be considered an apparent 

violation of the sponsor’s grant 

assurances, and the agency may 

consider grant enforcement under 14 

CFR part 16. 

4. FAA review. The FAA’s acceptance 

of the access plan represents an agency 

determination that the airport has met 

the compliance standards for existing 

residential through-the-fence access for 

a period not to exceed 20 years. The 

following actions will require an airport 

sponsor to update its access plan prior 

to its 20-year expiration: development of 

a new master plan, significant updates 


Emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
15038 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 53 / Friday, March 18, 2011 / Notices 

to an ALP, requests for federal financial 

participation in land acquisition, or any 

changes to the access agreement. An 

airport sponsor’s failure to implement 

its access plan could result in a 

violation of the special grant condition 

and potentially lead to a finding of 

noncompliance. 

5. Airports currently in 

noncompliance. Airports currently in 

noncompliance due to grant assurance 

violations related to through-the-fence 

access, such as grant assurance 19, 

Operation and Maintenance, will need 

to continue to work with ADO and 

regional division staff to establish an 

appropriate corrective action plan. An 

FAA-approved corrective action plan, 

once accepted by the FAA, will serve as 

the sponsor’s access plan. The decision 

to restore the sponsor’s compliance 

status will be made by the Manager of 

Airport Compliance. In cases where the 

airport’s safety and utility have been 

compromised, the Manager may require 

the sponsor to take definitive steps to 

address those concerns before restoring 

the sponsor to a compliant status. 

6. Airports with existing residential 

through-the-fence access that do not 

meet the compliance standards. The 

FAA recognizes that some airport 

sponsors will not be able to fully 

comply with the standards listed above, 

due to limits on the powers of the 

sponsor and/or other local governments, 

or on other legal limits on the sponsor’s 

discretion to adopt certain measures. 

Other airports have the capability to 

adopt measures to satisfy the 

compliance standards but have not done 

so. The FAA will take the following 

action with respect to any obligated 

airport with existing residential 

through-the-fence access that does not 

meet the minimum compliance 

standards: 

a. Airports that serve a function in the 

National Plan of Integrated Airport 

Systems (NPIAS) but cannot fully meet 

the through-the-fence compliance 

standards. Where the airport still 

substantially serves its intended 

function in the NPIAS, but residential 

through-the-fence access at the airport 

will have an adverse effect on the 

airport’s operations, its ability to grow, 

or its ability to accept new kinds of 

aviation use, the FAA will consider a 

reduced level of future AIP investment 

in the airport. FAA evaluation of 

investment needs will reflect any 

impairment in the airport’s utility due 

to residential through-the-fence use. The 

sponsor will not lose eligibility for 

entitlement grants on the basis of the 

through-the-fence access, but the FAA 

will have to consider the constraints on 

the utility of the airport to be a 

significant factor in AIP funding 

decisions. 

b. Airports that no longer have 

significant value in the national system. 

Where the residential through-the-fence 

access cannot be reasonably mitigated 

through the development of an access 

plan, and use of that access adversely 

affects the airport’s public use 

characteristics, the FAA will consider 

removal of the airport from the NPIAS 

consistent with the requirements of 

FAA Order 5090.3C Field Formulation 

of the National Plan of Integrated 

Airport Systems (NPIAS). The FAA may 

either take steps to recover unamortized 

grant funds, or may leave grant 

assurances in effect for the life of 

existing grants but award no new grants. 

c. Airports that fail to submit an 

access plan. The FAA expects airport 

sponsors with existing residential 

through-the-fence access to develop an 

access plan which preserves their 

proprietary rights and powers and 

mitigates the inherent challenges posed 

by this practice. Beginning in Fiscal 

Year 2013, a sponsor’s failure to comply 

with the interim policy may jeopardize 

its ability to compete for AIP grant 

funding. 

B. Requests to extend residential 

through-the-fence access at airports 

covered by this interim Policy 

As of the date of this notice March 18, 

2011, a sponsor proposing to extend an 

access arrangement must submit a 

current airport master plan and a 

revised residential through-the-fence 

access plan as detailed below. The ADO 

or regional division will forward its 

recommendations regarding each 

request to extend access to the Manager 

of Airport Compliance (Manager). Only 

the Manager may approve an airport 

sponsor’s request to extend access. In 

reviewing the proposal, the Manager 

may consult with the TSA. 

1. Master Plan. A sponsor wishing to 

extend an existing residential throughthe-fence access arrangement must 

submit a recent airport master plan to 

the ADO or regional division. The FAA 

considers a master plan to be recent if 

it was developed or updated within the 

past five years. The master plan should 

explain how the sponsor plans to 

address future growth, development, 

and use of the airport property over the 

next 20 years; airport sponsors should 

work with ADO or regional division 

staff to develop an appropriate scope of 

work for these master plans. 

2. Residential through-the-fence 

access plan. The sponsor is responsible 

for revising its access plan, as discussed 

under section IV.A.2 of this interim 

Policy, to reflect how it will meet the 

standards for compliance for the 

extended access. Once accepting the 

revised access plan, the FAA will 

condition future AIP grants upon its 

ongoing implementation. 

3. Continuing obligations. Once the 

revised access plan is accepted by the 

FAA, and if required, the revised ALP, 

is approved by the FAA, the sponsor 

must continue to comply with 

obligations described in section IV.A of 

this interim Policy. 

V. Eligibility for AIP grants 

A. General. Beginning in Fiscal Year 

2013, a sponsor will be required to 

submit their residential through-thefence access plans prior to notifying the 

FAA of its intent to apply for an AIP 

grant. The sponsor will not lose 

eligibility for entitlement grants on the 

basis of the through-the-fence access, 

but the FAA will have to consider the 

constraints on the utility of the airport 

to be a significant factor in AIP funding 

decisions. 

B. Public infrastructure and facilities 

with substantial benefit to private 

through-the-fence users. The FAA may 

be unable to justify the federal 

investment in a proposed project when 

private residential developments with 

through-the-fence access will receive 

substantial value from that federally 

assisted airport infrastructure and/or 

facility. 

C. Exclusive or primary private 

benefit. On-airport infrastructure and 

facilities used exclusively or primarily 

for accommodation of through-the-fence 

users are considered private-use and are 

ineligible for AIP grants. 

2. The Proposed Amendment to the 

Standard AIP Sponsor Assurances 

At this time, the FAA considers a 

sponsor’s consent to any permission for 

through-the-fence access to the airport 

from a residential property that does not 

meet the definition of ‘‘existing access’’ 

in this interim policy to be inconsistent 

with the sponsor’s grant assurances, 

specifically, the obligation to maintain 

rights and powers to control airport 

development and operation. Permitting 

such access to the airport may also 

result in violations of the obligation to 

impose a reasonable, not unjustly 

discriminatory rate structure that makes 

the airport as self-sustaining as possible, 

and the obligation to restrict areas 

adjacent to the airport to compatible 

land uses. 

Accordingly, the FAA will consider a 

new through-the-fence access 

arrangement from a property used as a 

residence or zoned for residential use to 

be an apparent violation of the sponsor’s 

grant assurances, and the agency may 

investigate any report of such action for 


Emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 53 / Friday, March 18, 2011 / Notices 15039 

possible enforcement under 14 CFR part 

16. Any action taken to strengthen, 

memorialize, or codify existing access in 

perpetuity beyond that described in an 

FAA approved residential through-thefence access plan at an airport with 

existing access will also be considered 

a new grant of through-the-fence access. 

The sponsor will, of course, have the 

opportunity to present information and 

arguments to the FAA during the Part 16 

process. 

In consideration of the above, the 

FAA adds new paragraph g. to standard 

AIP sponsor assurance 5, to read as 

follows: 

C. Sponsor Certification. The sponsor 

hereby assures and certifies, with respect to 

this grant that: 

* * * * * 

5. Preserving Rights and Powers. 

* * * * * 

g. It will not permit or enter into any 

arrangement that results in permission for the 

owner or tenant of a property used as a 

residence, or zoned for residential use, to taxi 

an aircraft between that property and any 

location on airport. 

Issued in Washington, DC on March 14, 

2011. 

Randall S. Fiertz, 

Director, Airport Compliance and Field 

Operations. 

[FR Doc. 2011–6346 Filed 3–17–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

RTCA Government/Industry NextGen 

Advisory Committee 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of RTCA Charter 

Renewal. 

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice 

to advise the public of the renewal of 

the RTCA Charter (FAA Order 

1110.77T) for two years, effective April 

2, 2011. The administrator is the 

sponsor of the committee. The objective 

of the advisory committee is to seek 

solutions to issues and challenges 

involving air transportation concepts, 

requirements, operational capabilities, 

and the associated use of technology 

and related considerations to 

aeronautical operations that impact the 

future Air Traffic Management System. 

RTCA provides the following two 

categories of recommendations to the 

FAA: Broad gauged policy and 

investment priority recommendations 

used by FAA when considering policy 

and program decisions; and minimum 

performance standards, reports, and 

guidance documents used by the FAA 

in regulatory decisions and rulemaking. 

Government regulatory and 

procurement practices reference or use 

RTCA standards (with or without 

change). The Secretary of 

Transportation has determined that that 

information and use of committee are 

necessary in the public interest in 

connection with the performance of 

duties imposed on the FAA by law. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

RTCA Secretariat, 1828 L Street, NW., 

Suite 805, Washington, DC, 20036; 

telephone (202) 833–9339; fax (202) 

833–9434; Web site http://www.rtca.org 

or the FAA Business Operations Group, 

NextGen and Operations Planning, 800 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC: telephone (202) 493– 

4409; fax (202) 267–5071. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Steering 

Committee and Special Committee 

meetings are open to the public and 

announced in the Federal Register, 

except as authorized by Section 10(d) of 

the Federal Advisory Committee Act. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on March 15, 

2011. 

Kathy Hitt, 

RTCA Advisory Committee. 

[FR Doc. 2011–6525 Filed 3–17–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Commercial Space Transportation 

Grants Program 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of request for grant 

proposals for the Commercial Space 

Transportation Grant Program. 

SUMMARY: This notice solicits Fiscal 

Year (FY) 2011 grant proposals to 

continue the development of a 

Commercial Space Transportation 

infrastructure system, which supports 

the National Space Policy and 

Congressional intent. Begun in 2010, the 

program supports the Commercial Space 

Transportation industry by 

identification, prioritization, and 

funding for Commercial Space 

Transportation infrastructure projects. 

It must be noted that with the FY 

2011 Congressional appropriation not 

yet enacted, the FAA’s Office of 

Commercial Space Transportation (AST) 

does not currently have funding for the 

Commercial Space Transportation 

Grants Program. Should there be an 

appropriation for the Commercial Space 

Transportation Grants Program; the 

FAA/AST intends to swiftly execute 

grant awards within FY 2011. To 

facilitate this, the FAA/AST is 

requesting grant applications at this 

time. The FAA/AST intends to receive, 

process, and evaluate the applications 

in a timely manner, and in accordance 

with the notional schedule listed below, 

so should there be an appropriation, the 

recipients will already be selected and 

the awards can be made within FY 

2011. There remains the possibility that 

no funds will be appropriated in FY 

2011 for the Commercial Space 

Transportation Grants Program. If no 

funds are appropriated, no grant 

applications submitted in response to 

this Notice will be approved and 

funded. 

Due to time constraints, this Notice 

will be the only solicitation made for FY 

2011 projects and proposals. The FAA/ 

AST will review and evaluate all 

applications for a grant received by the 

deadline, pursuant to 49 United States 

Code (U.S.C.) Chapter 703 (to be 

recodified at 51 U.S.C. Chapter 511). 

The FAA/AST may make one or more 

grant awards based upon its evaluations 

of the submissions. All grants awarded 

under the Commercial Space 

Transportation Grants Program are 

discretionary awards. Projects to be 

funded under the Commercial Space 

Transportation Grants Program must 

carry out commercial space 

transportation infrastructure 

development, as defined in 49 U.S.C. 

70301 (to be recodified as 51 U.S.C. 

51101). 

DATES: In order for the FAA/AST to 

award funds (if appropriated) prior to 

the end of FY 2011, the following 

notional schedule is provided. 

Submission Open Period Opens: March 

18, 2011 

Submission Open Period Closes: May 

13, 2011 

Review and Approval Period: May 16, 

2011 thru June 30, 2011 

Announcement: July 15, 2011 

ADDRESSES: Applicants can get more 

information about the Commercial 

Space Transportation Grants Program, to 

include a checklist for the submission 

package, by: 

1. Accessing the Office of Commercial 

Space Transportation website at: 

http://www.faa.gov/go/ast; or 

2. Contacting Glenn Rizner or Julie 

Price, AST–100, for program questions; 

or 

3. Contacting Greg Carter, AGC–510, 

for legal questions. 


Emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES