42296 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

1https://oeaaa.faa.gov. 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 77 

[Docket No. FAA–2006–25002; Amendment 

No. 77–13] 

RIN 2120–AH31 

Safe, Efficient Use and Preservation of 

the Navigable Airspace 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This action amends the 

regulations governing objects that may 

affect the navigable airspace. These 

rules have not been revised in several 

decades, and the FAA has determined it 

is necessary to update the regulations, 

incorporate case law and legislative 

action, and simplify the rule language. 

These changes will improve safety and 

promote the efficient use of the National 

Airspace System. 

DATES: This amendment becomes 

effective January 18, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

technical questions about this final rule 

contact Ellen Crum, Air Traffic Systems 

Operations, Airspace and Rules Group, 

AJR–33, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone (202) 267–8783, facsimile 

(202) 267–9328. For legal questions 

about this final rule contact Lorelei 

Peter, Office of the Chief Counsel– 

Regulations Division, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone (202) 267–3134, facsimile 

202–267–7971. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

The Administrator has broad 

authority to regulate the safe and 

efficient use of the navigable airspace 

(49 U.S.C. 40103(a)). The Administrator 

is also authorized to issue air traffic 

rules and regulations to govern the 

flight, navigation, protection, and 

identification of aircraft for the 

protection of persons and property on 

the ground, and for the efficient use of 

the navigable airspace (49 U.S.C. 

40103(b)). The Administrator may also 

conduct investigations and prescribe 

regulations, standards, and procedures 

in carrying out the authority under this 

part (49 U.S.C. 40113). The 

Administrator is authorized to protect 

civil aircraft in air commerce (49 U.S.C. 

44070(a)(5)). 

Under § 44701(a)(5), the 

Administrator promotes safe flight of 

civil aircraft in air commerce by 

prescribing regulations and minimum 

standards for other practices, methods, 

and procedures necessary for safety in 

air commerce and national security. 

Also, § 44718 provides that under 

regulations issued by the Administrator, 

notice to the agency is required for any 

construction, alteration, establishment, 

or expansion of a structure or sanitary 

landfill, when the notice will promote 

safety in air commerce, and the efficient 

use and preservation of the navigable 

airspace and airport traffic capacity at 

public use airports. This statutory 

provision also provides that, under 

regulations issued by the Administrator, 

the agency determines whether such 

construction or alteration is an 

obstruction of the navigable airspace, or 

an interference with air navigation 

facilities and equipment or the 

navigable airspace. If a determination is 

made that the construction or alteration 

creates an obstruction or otherwise 

interferes, the agency then conducts an 

aeronautical study to determine adverse 

impacts on the safe and efficient use of 

the airspace, facilities, or equipment. 

I. Background 

A. Summary of the Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking (NPRM) 

On June 13, 2006, the FAA published 

an NPRM that proposed to amend the 

regulations governing objects that may 

affect the navigable airspace (71 FR 

34028). The FAA proposed to: Establish 

notification requirements and 

obstruction standards for transmitting 

on certain frequencies; revise 

obstruction standards for civil airport 

imaginary surfaces to more closely align 

these standards with FAA airport design 

and instrument approach procedure 

(IAP) criteria; revise current definitions 

and include new definitions; require 

proponents to file with the FAA a notice 

of proposed construction or alteration 

for structures near private use airports 

that have an FAA-approved IAP; and 

increase the number of days in which a 

notice must be filed with the FAA 

before beginning construction or 

alteration. The comment period closed 

on September 11, 2006. 

B. Summary of the Final Rule 

The following is a discussion of the 

major changes contained in the final 

rule. The provisions of the final rule 

that were modified based on comments 

the FAA received are discussed in the 

‘‘Discussion of the Final Rule’’ section. 

Most of the amendments implemented 

by the rule are intended to simplify the 

existing regulations. 

This rule adds § 77.29 to incorporate 

the specific factors listed in P.L. 100– 

223 for consideration during an 

aeronautical study. The specific factors 

are listed in Appendix A to this 

preamble. Including this language in 

part 77 does not add or remove any of 

the factors currently considered in an 

aeronautical study. 

This rule provides for an FAA 

Determination of Hazard or 

Determination of No Hazard to become 

effective 40 days after the date of 

issuance, unless a petition for 

discretionary review is received by the 

FAA within 30 days of issuance. In 

addition, the rule stipulates that a 

Determination of No Hazard to air 

navigation will expire 18 months after 

the effective date of the determination, 

or on the date the proposed construction 

or alteration is abandoned. Also, the 

rule specifies that a Determination of 

Hazard to Air Navigation does not 

expire. 

This final rule adds information about 

the processing of petitions for 

discretionary review. It also excludes 

determinations for temporary structures 

and recommendations for marking and 

lighting from the discretionary review 

process. Because of the nature of 

temporary structures, it is not possible 

to apply the lengthy discretionary 

review process to these structures. Also, 

since marking and lighting 

recommendations are simply 

recommendations, there is a separate 

process for a waiver of, or deviation 

from, the recommendations. 

This rule expands the requirements 

for notice to be sent to the FAA for 

proposed construction or alteration of 

structures on or near private use airports 

that have an IAP. Accordingly, if a 

private use airport has an FAAapproved IAP, then a construction 

sponsor must notify the FAA of a 

proposed construction or alteration that 

exceeds the notice criteria in § 77.17. 

This action will give the FAA enough 

time to adjust the IAP, if needed, and to 

inform those who use the IAP. 

Also, IAPs at private use airports or 

heliports are not currently listed in any 

aeronautical publication. Sponsors of 

construction or alteration at or near a 

private use airport or heliport should 

consult the FAA Web site to determine 

whether an FAA-approved IAP is listed 

for that airport.1 If the airport is listed 

on the Web site, the sponsor must file 

notice with the FAA. 

Lastly, this rule incorporates minor 

edits to the regulatory text to distinguish 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 42297 

2Civil airport imaginary surfaces are established 

surfaces based on the runway that are used to 

identify objects that may impact airport plans or 

aircraft departure/arrival procedures or routes. 

Section 77.19 describes five types of imaginary 

surfaces: horizontal, conical, primary, approach and 

transitional. 

3 54–88 MHz; 150–216 MHz; 406–430 MHz; 931– 

940 MHz; 952–960 MHz; 1390–1400 MHz; 2500– 

2700 MHz; 3700–4200 MHz; 5000–5650 MHz; 

5925–6225 MHz; 7450–8550 MHz; 14.2–14.4 GHz. 

FAA surveillance systems from 

communication facilities. 

C. Summary of Comments 

The FAA received approximately 115 

comments from individuals, aviation 

associations, industry spectrum users, 

airlines, and other aviation businesses. 

Many commenters, including the Air 

Transport Association, generally 

supported the NPRM. Commenters 

supported specific proposals concerning 

evaluating the aeronautical impact of 

proposed construction on IAPs at 

private use airports; evaluating antenna 

installations that might affect air traffic 

or navigation; and the update and 

reformat of the regulations. Comments 

that did not support the proposed rule, 

and suggested changes, are discussed 

more fully in the ‘‘Discussion of the 

Final Rule’’ section. 

The FAA received substantive 

comments on the following general 

areas of the proposal: 

• Frequency notification requirements 

• Time requirement to file notice with 

the FAA 

• Civil Airport Imaginary Surfaces 2

• One Engine Inoperative Procedures 

(OEI) 

• Definitions 

• Miscellaneous 

II. Discussion of the Final Rule 

A. Frequency Notification 

The FAA’s primary focus during the 

obstruction evaluation process is safety 

and efficiency of the navigable airspace. 

It is critical for the agency to be notified 

of pending construction of physical 

objects that may affect the safety of 

aeronautical operations. (See 49 U.S.C. 

44718.) In today’s National Airspace 

System (NAS), however, 

electromagnetic transmissions can 

adversely affect on-board flight avionics, 

navigation, communication, and 

surveillance facilities. The FAA has 

extensive authority to prescribe 

regulations and minimum standards 

necessary for safety in air commerce. 

(See 49 U.S.C. § 44701(a)(5).) In 

addition, the FAA has broad authority 

to develop policy and plans for the use 

of the navigable airspace. (See 49 U.S.C. 

40103.) The FAA relied on these 

authorities in proposing the notice 

requirements for broadcast 

transmissions in the specified bands. As 

stated in the proposal, broadcast 

transmission on certain frequencies can 

pose serious safety threats to avionics 

and ground based facilities. At the same 

time, the FAA recognizes the authority 

of the National Telecommunications 

and Information Administration (NTIA) 

and the Federal Communications 

Commission (FCC) to manage use of the 

radio spectrum. 

The FAA concludes that its proposal 

to require notice for the proposed 

frequency bands was too broad. The 

proposed frequencies from the NPRM 

are listed in Appendix B to this 

preamble. The proposed frequencies in 

the shared (Federal and Non-Federal) 

bands are managed by an existing 

process involving several Federal 

agencies with an interest in spectrum 

use, which NTIA oversees under the 

Department of Commerce. It is not the 

FAA’s intent to add a duplicative 

review and coordination process to that 

already stated above. In addition, the 

FAA has determined that some of the 

proposed frequencies originally listed 

and not in shared bands do not present 

concern. Therefore, the agency 

withdraws the proposed notice and 

obstruction standards on the shared 

frequency bands and those frequency 

bands that, historically, have not posed 

electromagnetic concerns,3 when 

operating under typical specifications. 

FM broadcast service transmissions 

operating in the 88.0–107.9 MHz 

frequency band pose the greatest 

concern to FAA navigation signals. The 

FAA, FCC and NTIA are collaborating 

on the best way to address this issue. A 

resolution of this issue is expected soon. 

Therefore, the proposals on FM 

broadcast service transmissions in the 

88.0–107.9 MHz frequency band remain 

pending. The FAA will address the 

comments filed in this docket about the 

proposed frequency notice requirements 

and proposed EMI obstruction standards 

when a formal and collaborative 

decision is announced. 

This rule does include evaluating 

electromagnetic effect (§§ 77.29 and 

77.31), and it codifies the agency’s 

current practices of studying the effects 

on aircraft navigation and 

communication facilities. These 

amendments in no way should be 

construed to affect the authority of 

NTIA and the FCC. 

B. Time Requirement To File Notice 

With the FAA 

Automation improvements to the 

FAA’s obstruction evaluation program 

allow the public to file notices of 

proposed construction electronically, 

which facilitates the aeronautical study 

process and has reduced the overall 

processing time for these cases. The 

FAA proposed to require that notices of 

proposed construction or alterations 

must be filed with the FAA at least 60 

days before construction starts or the 

application filing date for a construction 

permit, whichever is earliest. The 

current rule requires 30 days, which the 

FAA found inadequate for cases to be 

processed, particularly if additional 

information, via public comment 

period, was necessary to complete the 

study. At the time the FAA published 

the NPRM, the automation system was 

in the early stages, and the full benefits 

of the automation were not yet known. 

Commenters were split on their support 

of this proposal, depending on their 

interests. Comments from the aviation 

industry largely supported the extended 

time period. Comments filed by the 

building industry, however, opposed 

the extended time period, saying it was 

too long and would cause undue delay. 

The FAA has seen great success with 

the automation system and concludes 

that requiring notice to be filed 60 days 

before construction or the permit 

application is not necessary. There are 

cases where circulating the proposal for 

public comment may be necessary and, 

consequently, these cases may require 

up to 45 days for processing. Therefore, 

the FAA adopts the requirement that 

notice must be filed with the FAA for 

proposed construction or alteration at 

least 45 days before either the date that 

construction begins, or the date of the 

construction permit application, 

whichever is earliest. 

Because applications are required 

within 45 days of construction, the 

FAA, Department of Defense, and 

Department of Homeland Security 

should work together to conduct timely 

reviews. To that end, the FAA will 

respond to inquiries from applicants 

regarding the status of applications, the 

reason(s) for any delay, and the 

projected date of completion. As 

appropriate, the FAA will engage with 

other Federal Agencies such as the 

Department of Defense, the Department 

of Homeland Security, the Department 

of Energy, and the Department of 

Interior to expedite any further 

regulatory modifications and 

improvements to 14 CFR Part 77 to 

ensure there is a predictable, consistent, 

transparent, and timely application 

process for the wind industry. 

Several commenters recommended 

separate notice requirements for 

reviewing a temporary structure that 

might be necessary under emergencytype circumstances. An example 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
42298 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

4https://oeaaa.faa.gov. 

5The FAA proposed definitions for the terms 

‘‘precision instrument runway’’ and ‘‘non-precision 

instrument runway’’ to be based on the use of 

visibility minimums, rather than approach 

procedure classification, given that visibility is the 

critical factor during the visual portion of the 

approach. 

submitted in the comments was a 

construction crane that was necessary to 

replace air conditioning units on the 

roof of factories. The commenters 

contend that it is neither logical nor 

feasible to shut down a factory for 30 

days while the FAA studies this 

temporary structure. 

Situations like the one presented by 

these commenters are not uncommon. 

Regardless of whether the structure is 

temporary, it remains critical for the 

FAA to have notice of tall structures 

that can affect aeronautical operations. 

In most cases, the proponent of the 

structure contacts the FAA Obstruction 

Evaluation (OE) specialist and identifies 

the need for a quick review, for which 

the agency readily responds. While the 

FAA regrets any past delay in taking 

quick action on a particular case, the 

agency declines to set-up special 

procedures to address such cases. On 

the FAA’s OE Web site,4 the agency lists 

the contact information for the FAA 

specialist. If a sponsor is concerned 

with the time frame for the FAA’s 

review, the agency encourages the 

sponsor to contact the FAA specialist 

directly. 

C. Civil Airport Imaginary Surfaces 

The NPRM proposed, for a visual 

runway used by small aircraft or 

restricted to day-only instrument 

operations, that the width of the 

imaginary approach surface expand 

uniformly to 1,250 ft. If the runway is 

a visual runway, used by other than 

small aircraft or for instrument night 

circling, the surface width expands 

uniformly from 1,500 ft. to 3,500 ft. If 

the runway is a non-precision 

instrument or precision instrument 

runway, the surface width expands 

uniformly to 4,000 ft. and 16,000 ft., 

respectively. Other changes include 

removing approach surface widths of 

1,500 ft. and 2,000 ft., and increasing 

the width for some non-precision 

runways from 2,000 ft. to 4,000 ft. The 

NPRM also proposed expanding the 

width of the primary approach surface 

of a non-precision instrument runway or 

precision instrument runway from 500 

feet to 1,000 ft. 

Many commenters opposed the 

proposed expansion of the primary 

surface. They argued that the proposed 

expansion would require airport 

operators to remove existing structures 

that would fall within the proposed 

expanded surface, which would result 

in a financial burden to airport owners 

and managers. Southwest Airlines, on 

the other hand, supported the proposal 

and stated the ability to study and 

review more proposed structures is 

positive for airport safety. 

Several comments stated that the 

imaginary surfaces in part 77 do not 

comport clearly with the surfaces used 

for obstacle clearance under the United 

States Standard for Terminal Instrument 

Procedures (TERPS) and, therefore, 

makes the part 77 surfaces useless as a 

project planning tool for airport 

development. 

Similarly, another commenter argued 

that the Required Navigation 

Performance (RNP) lateral protection 

area is greater than the width of the 

primary surface and the RNP procedures 

TERPS surface is outside the part 77 

imaginary surface. The commenter 

contends that an obstacle can adversely 

impact an RNP procedure, but not be 

characterized as an obstruction. This 

commenter recommends that the 

imaginary surfaces be expanded to 

include RNP procedures. 

Several commenters specifically 

questioned whether current obstructions 

that fall within the newly expanded 

primary surface could impact an 

instrument procedure and result in the 

airport losing the instrument procedure. 

One airport authority was concerned 

about marking and lighting 

recommendations for existing structures 

that will now fall under the expanded 

primary surface. 

The FAA proposed these changes to 

more closely align regulatory provisions 

in part 77 with TERPS criteria and 

airport design standards. The 

inconsistency between IAP criteria, 

airport design standards, and part 77 

surfaces has been a source of confusion 

for both airport managers and the FAA. 

These specific proposals would not 

have altered the notice criteria. Instead, 

the proposals were meant to identify 

more proposed structures as 

obstructions that the FAA could study 

to determine if they would adversely 

affect the NAS. 

However, since publication of the 

NPRM, the FAA has begun a 

coordinated effort to consolidate all 

agency requirements for the treatment of 

obstacles in the airport environment. 

Once completed, the new requirements 

will form the basis for revised civil 

airport imaginary surfaces. Thus, it 

would not be prudent to codify the 

proposals. Further, amending or 

expanding any of the civil airport 

imaginary surfaces at this time would 

not be in the best interest of the public. 

The FAA, therefore, withdraws all 

proposed modifications to the civil 

airport imaginary surfaces, including 

the chart format. The FAA will keep the 

civil airport imaginary surfaces rule as 

it is currently described in 14 CFR 

77.25. 

D. One Engine Inoperative Procedures 

The NPRM specifically states that OEI 

procedures were not a part of the 

rulemaking. The NPRM further notes 

that the FAA has tasked the Airport 

Obstruction Standards Committee 

(AOSC) with examining this issue. 

Comments from the Air Transport 

Association, individual airlines, local 

airport authorities, and aviation 

organizations, asked the FAA to address 

OEI procedures. These comments have 

been forwarded to the AOSC for 

consideration. As appropriate, the FAA 

will advise the aviation industry and 

other interested persons, through the 

AOSC, of any policy changes. 

E. Definitions 

The NPRM proposed replacing the 

term ‘‘utility runway’’ with the phrase 

‘‘runway used by small aircraft’’. In 

addition, the NPRM proposed amending 

the definitions for precision, nonprecision, and visual runways, as these 

definitions were no longer up-to-date 

with industry practices. The term 

‘‘utility runway’’ is not widely used in 

industry so the NPRM proposed 

replacing the term. In addition, the 

NPRM proposed amending the 

definitions for precision and nonprecision runways to address 

approaches that use other than ground 

based navigational aids, such as flight 

management systems (FMS) and global 

navigation satellite systems (GNSS). 

Because of technological advances, the 

former definitions for precision and 

non-precision runways are no longer 

accurate. 

By removing the term ‘‘utility 

runway’’, commenters stated the 

portions of the rule that include the 

term became confusing. They note that 

the runway classifications and 

corresponding widths for the primary 

and approach surfaces in the tables in 

§ 77.19(d)(e) are difficult to understand. 

Several commenters confused the 

proposed definitions for precision and 

non-precision instrument runways with 

the definitions for precision and nonprecision instrument approach 

procedures.5 One commenter suggested 

the non-precision runway definition 

should exclude a runway that has a 

developed instrument approach 

procedure with visibility minimums of 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 42299 

one statute mile. This commenter 

contends that many small, general 

aviation airports have published 

procedures with one mile visibility 

under the current obstruction criteria of 

a utility runway. The commenter also 

notes that if the FAA adopts the 

proposal to limit non-precision runways 

to procedures with visibility minimums 

of one statute mile, then these small 

airports would need to have the more 

demanding primary surfaces and 

approach criteria. The commenter 

further says this could result in 

financial hardship for these airports and 

the airports may need to double the 

designated airspace around the runway. 

Another commenter stated that the new 

definition for a non-precision runway 

conflicts with FAA Advisory Circular 

150/5300–13, Airport Design. 

Commenters also indicated that the 

new definition and associated surfaces 

would take runways that currently 

qualify as utility into the non-precision 

category. They say these modifications 

could result in unfunded economic 

burdens on outlying airports with IAPs 

to utility runways that experience lower 

traffic densities. Additionally, 

commenters noted that many of these 

airports are configured with minimal 

infrastructure and could face significant 

airport expansion to obtain IAP services 

if the runway is categorized as nonprecison. 

Several commenters also stated that 

the proposed definitions of precision 

and non-precision runways try to 

redefine the current precision and nonprecision instrument procedures 

because satellite technology could, in 

the future, enable non-precision 

approaches to become precision 

approaches. 

Although the FAA proposed to revise 

these definitions, on further review, the 

agency has determined it should not 

revise them at this time. The definitions 

were proposed to support implementing 

satellite-based navigation. However, as 

the satellite-based navigation program 

has evolved during development of this 

rulemaking, the agency has learned of 

unintended consequences of the 

proposed definitions. For example, 

changing the runway definition creates 

infrastructure requirements that may be 

needed as the technology evolves. The 

FAA believes a more measured 

approach is needed before making any 

changes to the definitions. Thus, the 

agency will not adopt the proposed 

revisions to the definitions in this final 

rule. 

F. Extension to a Determination of No 

Hazard 

The NPRM proposed a provision for 

which an extension to the expiration 

date for a Determination of No Hazard 

may be granted. Specifically, it 

proposed that for structures not subject 

to FCC review, a Determination of No 

Hazard can be extended for a maximum 

of 18 months, if necessary. If more than 

18 months is necessary, then a new 

aeronautical study would be initiated. 

For structures that require an FCC 

construction permit, the NPRM 

proposed that a Determination of No 

Hazard can be extended for up to 12 

months, provided the sponsor submits 

evidence that an application for a 

construction permit was filed within 6 

months of the date of issuance. The 

NPRM also proposed that if the FCC 

extends the original FCC construction 

completion date, the sponsor must 

request an extension of the FAA’s 

Determination of No Hazard. 

Many commenters found that the two 

time periods (18 and 12 months) were 

confusing. The FAA’s review of this 

matter concluded that it is not necessary 

to continue the distinction between 

structures subject to FCC review from 

structures that do not need this review, 

simply to extend the expiration date. 

Therefore, for simplification and 

standardization, the FAA amends the 

time period for extensions to 

determinations of structures to 18 

months, regardless of whether an FCC 

construction permit is necessary. 

In addition, the FAA unintentionally 

omitted a section of the current rule 

from the NPRM. That section states that 

if the FCC denies a construction permit, 

the final determination expires on the 

date of the denial. The FAA has 

reinserted that section in this final rule. 

G. Effective Date 

The effective date of this final rule is 

180 days from the date the rule is 

published in the Federal Register. The 

FAA needs this time to amend the 

automation system it uses to evaluate 

obstructions, amend relevant FAA 

orders, train employees, and educate the 

public. 

H. Miscellaneous 

One commenter said the requirement 

to file notice should extend to structures 

that would penetrate an imaginary 

surface relative to a planned or 

proposed airport. Specifically, this 

commenter seeks to incorporate the 

imaginary surfaces for evaluating 

obstructions under § 77.19(a) in the 

notice requirements for structures that 

are on or around a planned airport. 

Section 77.9 requires notice for 

construction on an existing airport or an 

airport under construction. This section 

specifies an imaginary surface extending 

from the runway (in increments of 

20,000 feet, 10,000 ft., or 5,000 ft., 

depending on the length of the airport’s 

runway or heliport) at a specific slope 

for which notice is required if it would 

penetrate one of the surfaces for either 

an existing airport or an airport under 

construction. The above referenced 

surfaces, for which the longest surface 

would extend approximately 3.78 miles 

from the end of the runway, do not 

apply to a planned airport for which 

construction has yet to begin. 

The effect of this commenter’s request 

would be to require notice for up to 

approximately 3.5 miles (for the longest 

runway) for any construction that 

penetrates the 100 to 1 surface for a 

planned or proposed airport. 

This comment is outside the scope of 

the NPRM. The essence of this comment 

would be a new notice requirement for 

planned or proposed airports. To 

accommodate this comment without 

providing the public an opportunity to 

comment on its impact would violate 

the Administrative Procedure Act. 

Notwithstanding the above scope 

issue, to apply the imaginary surface 

from the notice requirements to planned 

or proposed airports would be difficult 

to implement. A planned or proposed 

airport can be at varying stages of 

development, with runway(s) location 

and configuration undetermined, 

navigational aids not sited, and 

instrument approach and departure 

procedures yet to be developed. It 

would be impossible for the FAA to 

study (and apply the obstruction 

standards) with any degree of certainty, 

to a proposed structure when the above 

listed airport issues are not defined. In 

addition, airport development can be 

subject to environmental laws and 

lengthy processes with alternative plans 

that must be analyzed. The FAA cannot 

‘‘reserve’’ airspace on such speculative 

plans. The agency does study the impact 

of structures that are identified as 

obstructions on planned or proposed 

airports that are on file with the FAA. 

As the details of a planned airport 

become part of the ‘‘plan on file’’ with 

the FAA or the Airport Layout Plan, on 

which the FAA can rely, the FAA 

includes those details during the study. 

Several commenters questioned the 

proposed removal of the regulatory 

provisions addressing antenna farms 

and whether any antenna farms 

currently exist. The FAA has not 

established any antenna farm area. 

Moreover, the regulations governing 

structures addresses the FAA needs 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
42300 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

6 14 CFR Section 91.119(c) provides that ‘‘Except 

when necessary for takeoff and landing, no person 

may operate an aircraft below the following 

altitudes: (b) Over other than congested areas. An 

altitude of 500 feet above the surface except over 

open water or sparely populated areas. In those 

cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 

500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure.’’ 7https://oeaaa.faa.gov. 8 71 FR 34028; June 13, 2006. 

here. Thus, this rule removes the 

provisions governing antenna farms. 

One commenter questioned why an 

object that is shielded by another 

structure is not subject to the notice 

requirements. This commenter contends 

that if the structure that shields an 

unreported structure is dismantled, 

there is no record of the first structure, 

nor is there any requirement to notify 

the FAA of this structure if the shielding 

structure is dismantled. 

Section 77.15(a) provides that notice 

is not required for a structure if the 

shielding structure is of a substantial 

and permanent nature and is located in 

a congested area of a city, town, or 

settlement where the shielded structure 

will not adversely affect safety in air 

navigation. This exception does not 

apply in areas where there are only one 

or two other structures. The FAA has 

not experienced a situation like the one 

described by the commenter that can be 

attributed to this exception. This rule 

does expand the current supplemental 

notice requirements in § 77.11, and 

specifies that if a construction or 

alteration is abandoned, dismantled, or 

destroyed, notice must be provided to 

the FAA within 5 days after the 

construction is abandoned, dismantled, 

or destroyed. In the rare case where a 

shielding structure is abandoned, 

dismantled, or destroyed, the proponent 

must notify the FAA so that appropriate 

actions concerning adjacent structures 

can be initiated. 

Prior to this rule, part 77 provided 

that a proposed or existing structure was 

an obstruction to air navigation if it was 

higher than 500 ft. above ground level 

(AGL). The minimum altitude to operate 

an aircraft over non-congested areas is 

500 feet above the surface.6

Consequently, an aircraft could be 

operating at 500 ft. AGL and encounter 

a structure that was 500 ft. AGL that 

might not have been studied by the FAA 

during the obstacle evaluation process. 

The FAA adopts the proposal that 

lowers the height of a structure 

identified as an obstruction from above 

500 ft. to above 499 ft. Accordingly, all 

structures that are above 499 ft. tall will 

be obstructions, and the FAA will study 

them to determine their effect on the 

navigable airspace. This will ensure that 

all usable airspace at and above 500 ft. 

AGL is addressed during the 

aeronautical study and that this airspace 

is protected from obstructions that may 

create a hazard to air navigation. 

III. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires that the 

FAA consider the impact of paperwork 

and other information collection 

burdens imposed on the public. 

According to the 1995 amendments to 

the Paperwork Reduction Act (5 CFR 

1320.8(b)(2)(vi)), an agency may not 

collect or sponsor the collection of 

information, nor may it impose an 

information collection requirement 

unless it displays a currently valid 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) control number. As required by 

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(44 U.S.C. 3507(d)), the FAA submitted 

a copy of the new information collection 

requirements(s) discussed below to 

OMB for its review. Notice of OMB 

approval for this information collection 

will be published in a future Federal 

Register document. 

Title 49 U.S.C. 44718 states, ‘‘By 

regulation or by order when necessary, 

the Secretary of Transportation shall 

require a person to give adequate public 

notice, in the form and way the 

Secretary prescribes, of the 

construction, alteration, establishment, 

or expansion, of a structure or sanitary 

landfill when public notice will 

promote: 

(1) safety in air commerce; and 

(2) the efficient use and preservation of the 

navigable airspace and of airport traffic 

capacity at public use airports.’’ 

This final rule implements the 

requirement for notification by requiring 

that notice be submitted to the FAA for 

proposed construction or alteration of 

structures on or near private use airports 

that have an IAP. Accordingly, if a 

private use airport has an FAAapproved IAP, then a construction 

sponsor is required to notify the FAA of 

a proposed construction or alteration 

that exceeds the notice criteria in 

§ 77.17. This action will give the FAA 

adequate time to adjust the IAP, if 

needed, and to inform those who use 

the IAP. While IAPs at private use 

airports or heliports are not currently 

listed in any aeronautical publication, 

sponsors of construction or alteration at 

or near a private use airport or heliport 

can consult the FAA Web site7 to 

determine whether an FAA-approved 

IAP is listed for that airport. If the 

airport is listed on the Web site, the 

sponsor must file notice with the FAA. 

The intent of these changes is to 

improve safety and promote the efficient 

use of the National Airspace System. 

The FAA estimates that on average, 

3,325 Form 7460–1s would be filed 

annually. It is estimated to take 19 

minutes, or 0.32 hours, to fill out each 

form. Hence, the estimated hour burden 

is: 0.32 hours × 3,325 = 1,064 hours. 

The average cost for a firm to prepare 

the form itself is approximately $40 per 

form. It is estimated that 20 percent of 

the forms filed would be filed this way. 

Thus, the estimated average annual 

reporting burden for companies to 

process this form in-house would be: 

(FAA Form 7460–1) $40 × 665 = 

$26,600. 

The average cost for a company to 

outsource this function to a contractor is 

approximately $480 per report. It is 

estimated that 80 percent of the forms 

filed would be filed this way. Thus, the 

estimated average annual reporting 

burden for companies to outsource this 

function is: (FAA Form 7460–1) $480 × 

2,660 = $1,276,800. 

It is estimated that roughly 30 percent 

of firms filing FAA Form 7460–1 will 

need to perform a site survey to 

complete the form. The cost of a site 

survey is $790. Thus, the estimated 

annual reporting burden for companies 

who require a site survey would be: 

(FAA Form 7460–1) $790 × 998 = 

$788,420. 

Hence, the total annual cost to firms 

that fill out FAA Form 7460–1 is 

$2,091,820. 

In the proposed rule, the FAA asked 

for comments on the information 

collection burden. You may view the 

FAA’s specific request in the proposed 

rule.8 The FAA received comments from 

multiple commenters. The following is 

a summary of the comments with the 

FAA’s response: 

Several commenters stated that the 

FAA underestimated the costs, in terms 

of time and paperwork, associated with 

preparing a Form 7460–1, as well as the 

costs of filing an OE notice, so the FAA 

should revise its estimates. One 

commenter surveyed its members and 

the survey indicated that the cost of 

processing a Form 7460–1 in-house was 

$406 and took about 1.6 hours per form. 

Further, the average hourly labor cost 

was found to be $36 per hour. The 

commenter also stated that in addition 

to maps, a site survey is needed to 

complete Form 7460–1, which ensures 

the accuracy of the location and costs an 

average of $768. Another commenter 

supported the notion of including the 

cost of a site survey in the cost 

estimation for filing a Form 7460–1. 

Another commenter suggested that the 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 42301 

FAA increase its estimate for processing 

a Form 7460–1 in-house to $40. 

The FAA omitted the cost of a site 

survey in the preliminary analysis 

because a site survey is not required to 

complete a Form 7460–1. However, a 

site survey must be completed if it is 

requested by the FAA’s Flight Procedure 

Office. The agency has revised the cost 

analysis to reflect the wider range of 

costs as supplied by the commenters. 

The FAA also revised its cost and 

paperwork analyses to include the cost 

of filing a form in-house, as well as the 

costs of a site survey. 

A few commenters claimed that the 

FAA underestimated the time and 

paperwork costs associated with filing 

additional notices. Another commenter 

believed that the FAA underestimated 

the paperwork burden that will be 

placed on radio spectrum users. 

The FAA completed a paperwork 

reduction package for the proposed rule, 

which did show the estimated 

paperwork costs. The paperwork costs 

were also shown in the initial regulatory 

evaluation and were available for review 

in the docket. However, the FAA has 

elected not to adopt the radio frequency 

notice requirements in this final rule. As 

a result, there will be no additional 

paperwork burden placed on radio 

spectrum users at this time. 

A commenter stated that requiring 

applicants to provide notice to the FAA 

60 days in advance could also increase 

the number of filings because of the rule 

change. Another commenter stated that 

extending the notice period for all 

proposed projects will cause undue 

delay in securing FAA approval and 

will delay the ability of utilities to 

develop new sites. 

The FAA has reduced the filing time 

period from 60 days to 45 days. This 

should mitigate the delay expected by 

the commenters and allow them to 

continue their operations without much 

change. Thus, the FAA does not expect 

any delays in construction or 

operational deficiencies resulting from 

the final rule. 

International Compatibility 

In keeping with U.S. obligations 

under the Convention on International 

Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to 

comply with International Civil 

Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards 

and Recommended Practices to the 

maximum extent practicable. The FAA 

has reviewed the corresponding ICAO 

Standards and Recommended Practices 

and has identified no new differences 

with these proposed regulations. 

IV. Regulatory Evaluation, Regulatory 

Flexibility Determination, International 

Trade Impact Assessment, and 

Unfunded Mandates Assessment 

Changes to Federal regulations must 

undergo several economic analyses. 

First, Executive Order 12866 directs that 

each Federal agency shall propose or 

adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned 

determination that the benefits of the 

intended regulation justify its costs. 

Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

of 1980 (Pub. L. 96–354) requires 

agencies to analyze the economic 

impact of regulatory changes on small 

entities. Third, the Trade Agreements 

Act (Pub. L. 96–39) prohibits agencies 

from setting standards that create 

unnecessary obstacles to the foreign 

commerce of the United States. In 

developing U.S. standards, this Trade 

Act requires agencies to consider 

international standards and, where 

appropriate, that they be the basis of 

U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 

104–4) requires agencies to prepare a 

written assessment of the costs, benefits, 

and other effects of proposed or final 

rules that include a Federal mandate 

likely to result in the expenditure by 

state, local, or tribal governments, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector, of 

$100 million or more annually (adjusted 

for inflation with base year of 1995). 

This portion of the preamble 

summarizes the FAA’s analysis of the 

economic impacts of this final rule. 

Readers seeking greater detail should 

read the full regulatory evaluation, a 

copy of which is in the docket for this 

rulemaking. 

In conducting these analyses, the FAA 

has determined that this final rule has 

benefits that justify its costs and is not 

economically significant under 

Executive Order 12866; however, it is 

otherwise ‘‘significant’’ because of 

concerns raised by the National 

Telecommunications and Information 

Administration (NTIA) and the Federal 

Communications Commission (FCC) 

regarding the FAA’s evaluation of 

potential electromagnetic effect during 

aeronautical studies. The final rule, if 

adopted, will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities, will not create 

unnecessary obstacles to international 

trade, and will not impose an unfunded 

mandate on state, local, tribal 

governments, or on the private sector. 

This final rule amends 14 CFR part 

77. These amendments refer to the rules 

for obstruction evaluation standards, 

aeronautical studies, and notice 

provisions about objects that could 

create hazards to air navigation. 

The FAA estimates the cost of this 

final rule to private industry will be 

approximately $20.9 million ($14.1 

million, present value) over the next 10 

years. The estimated cost of the final 

rule to the FAA will be approximately 

$18.7 million ($12.6 million, present 

value) over the next 10 years. Therefore, 

the total cost associated with the final 

rule will be approximately $39.6 million 

($26.8 million, present value) over the 

next 10 years. 

The final rule will enhance protection 

of aircraft approaches from unknown 

obstructions and unknown alteration 

projects on or near private use airports 

with FAA-approved instrument 

approach procedures (IAPs). The FAA 

contends that these qualitative benefits 

justify the costs of the final rule. 

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

establishes ‘‘as a principle of regulatory 

issuance that agencies shall endeavor, 

consistent with the objective of the rule 

and of applicable statutes, to fit 

regulatory and informational 

requirements to the scale of the 

business, organizations, and 

governmental jurisdictions subject to 

regulation.’’ To achieve that principle, 

the Act requires agencies to solicit and 

consider flexible regulatory proposals 

and to explain the rationale for their 

actions. The Act covers a wide range of 

small entities, including small 

businesses, not-for-profit organizations 

and small governmental jurisdictions. 

Agencies must perform a review to 

determine whether a proposed or final 

rule will have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. If the determination is that it 

will, the agency must prepare a 

regulatory flexibility analysis (RFA) as 

described in the Act. 

However, if an agency determines that 

a proposed or final rule is not expected 

to have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities, section 605(b) of the 1980 Act 

provides that the head of the agency 

may so certify and an RFA is not 

required. The certification must include 

a statement providing the factual basis 

for this determination, and the 

reasoning should be clear. 

While the FAA does not maintain 

data on the size of businesses that file 

notices, the FAA estimates that 

approximately 40 percent of the OE 

notices will be filed by small businesses 

(comprised of business owners and 

private use airport owners) as defined 

by the Small Business Administration. 

Thus, in 2010 when the rule is expected 

to take effect, the FAA expects 

approximately 2,400 more OE notices 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
42302 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

will be filed by affected parties. Of those 

applications filed, approximately 960 

notices are estimated to be filed by 

small businesses (using 40 percent 

assumption). 

For those small businesses that are 

inexperienced in submitting the 

necessary paperwork, the FAA believes 

they would either hire a consultant or 

spend as much as the consultant fee 

($480) in staff time to understand, 

research, complete, and submit the 

form(s). For the purpose of this 

regulatory flexibility assessment, the 

FAA assumes that it will cost all small 

entities approximately $480 per case to 

meet the requirements of part 77. 

It is unlikely that any individual 

small entity will file more than three OE 

notices in a calendar year. As a result, 

the FAA estimates that in virtually all 

cases, the cost of this rule to small 

businesses will not exceed $1500 per 

small entity, a cost the FAA does not 

consider significant. Therefore, as the 

FAA Administrator, I certify that this 

rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. 

International Trade Impact Assessment 

The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 

(Pub. L. 96–39), as amended by the 

Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. 

L. 103–465), prohibits Federal agencies 

from establishing standards or engaging 

in related activities that create 

unnecessary obstacles to the foreign 

commerce of the United States. 

Pursuant to these Acts, the 

establishment of standards is not 

considered an unnecessary obstacle to 

the foreign commerce of the United 

States, so long as the standard has a 

legitimate domestic objective, such as 

the protection of safety, and does not 

operate in a manner that excludes 

imports that meet this objective. The 

statute also requires consideration of 

international standards and, where 

appropriate, that they be the basis for 

U.S. standards. The FAA has assessed 

the potential effect of this final rule and 

determined that it will have only a 

domestic impact and, therefore, will not 

create unnecessary obstacles to the 

foreign commerce of the United States. 

Unfunded Mandates Assessment 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4) 

requires each Federal agency to prepare 

a written statement assessing the effects 

of any Federal mandate in a proposed or 

final agency rule that may result in an 

expenditure of $100 million or more (in 

1995 dollars) in any one year by state, 

local, and tribal governments, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector; such 

a mandate is deemed to be a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action.’’ The FAA currently 

uses an inflation-adjusted value of 

$136.1 million in lieu of $100 million. 

This final rule does not contain such a 

mandate; therefore, the requirements of 

Title II of the Act do not apply. 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

The FAA has analyzed this final rule 

under the principles and criteria of 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The 

FAA determined that this action will 

not have a substantial direct effect on 

the States, or the relationship between 

the Federal Government and the States, 

or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, and, therefore, 

does not have federalism implications. 

Environmental Analysis 

FAA Order 1050.1E identifies FAA 

actions that are categorically excluded 

from preparation of an environmental 

assessment or environmental impact 

statement under the National 

Environmental Policy Act in the 

absence of extraordinary circumstances. 

The FAA has determined this 

rulemaking action qualifies for the 

categorical exclusion identified in 

paragraph 312f and involves no 

extraordinary circumstances. 

Regulations That Significantly Affect 

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use 

The FAA has analyzed this final rule 

under Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations that 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). We 

have determined that it is not a 

‘‘significant energy action’’ under the 

executive order because it is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

Executive Order 12866, and it is not 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. 

Availability of Rulemaking Documents 

You can get an electronic copy of 

rulemaking documents using the 

Internet by— 

1. Searching the Federal eRulemaking 

Portal (http://www.regulations.gov); 

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/fr/index.html. 

You can also get a copy by sending a 

request to the Federal Aviation 

Administration, Office of Rulemaking, 

ARM–1, 800 Independence Avenue, 

SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by 

calling (202) 267–9680. Make sure to 

identify the amendment number or 

docket number of this rulemaking. 

Anyone is able to search the 

electronic form of all comments 

received into any of our dockets by the 

name of the individual submitting the 

comment (or signing the comment, if 

submitted on behalf of an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). You may 

review DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

statement in the Federal Register 

published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 

65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78) or you 

may visit http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act 

The Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 

1996 requires FAA to comply with 

small entity requests for information or 

advice about compliance with statutes 

and regulations within its jurisdiction. If 

you are a small entity and you have a 

question regarding this document, you 

may contact your local FAA official, or 

the person listed under the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT heading at the 

beginning of the preamble. You can find 

out more about SBREFA on the Internet 

at http://www.faa.gov/ 

regulations_policies/rulemaking/ 

sbre_act/. 

Appendix A to the Preamble 

Under regulations (49 U.S.C. 44718) 

prescribed by the Secretary, if the Secretary 

decides that constructing or altering a 

structure may result in an obstruction of the 

navigable airspace or an interference with air 

navigation facilities and equipment or the 

navigable airspace, the Secretary shall 

conduct an aeronautical study to decide the 

extent of any adverse impact on the safe and 

efficient use of the airspace, facilities, or 

equipment. In conducting the study, the 

Secretary shall consider factors relevant to 

the efficient and effective use of the 

navigable airspace, including— 

(A) The impact on arrival, departure, and 

en route procedures for aircraft operating 

under visual flight rules; 

(B) The impact on arrival, departure, and 

en route procedures for aircraft operating 

under instrument flight rules; 

(C) The impact on existing public use 

airports and aeronautical facilities; 

(D) The impact on planned public use 

airports and aeronautical facilities; and 

(E) The cumulative impact resulting from 

the proposed construction or alteration of a 

structure when combined with the impact of 

other existing or proposed structures. 

Appendix B to the Preamble 

The NPRM proposed that notice must be 

filed with the FAA for any construction of a 

new, or modification of an existing facility, 

i.e.—building, antenna structure, or any other 

man-made structure, which supports a 

radiating element(s) for the purpose of radio 

frequency transmissions operating on the 

following frequencies: 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 42303 

(i) 54–108 MHz 

(ii) 150–216 MHz 

(iii) 406–430 MHz 

(iv) 931–940 MHz 

(v) 952–960 MHz 

(vi) 1390–1400 MHz 

(vii) 2500–2700 MHz 

(viii) 3700–4200 MHz 

(ix) 5000–5650 MHz 

(x) 5925–6525 MHz 

(xi) 7450–8550 MHz 

(xii) 14.2–14.4 GHz 

(xiii) 21.2–23.6 GHz 

In addition, the NPRM proposed that any 

changes or modification to a system 

operating on one of the previously mentioned 

frequencies when specified in the original 

FAA determination, including: 

(i) Change in the authorized frequency; 

(ii) Addition of new frequencies; 

(iii) Increase in effective radiated power 

(ERP) equal or greater than 3 decibels; 

(iv) modification of radiating elements, 

including: (A) Antenna mounting locations(s) 

if increased 100 feet or more irrespective of 

whether the overall height is increased; (B) 

changes in antenna specification (including 

gain, beam-width, polarization, pattern); and 

(C) change in antenna azimuth/bearing (e.g. 

point-to-point microwave systems). 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 77 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Airports, Airspace, Aviation 

safety, Navigation (air), Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

V. The Amendment 

■ In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

amends Chapter I of title 14, Code of 

Federal Regulations by revising part 77 

to read as follows: 

PART 77—SAFE, EFFICIENT USE, AND 

PRESERVATION OF THE NAVIGABLE 

AIRSPACE 

Subpart A—General 

Sec. 

77.1 Purpose. 

77.3 Definitions. 

Subpart B—Notice Requirements 

77.5 Applicability. 

77.7 Form and time of notice. 

77.9 Construction or alteration requiring 

notice. 

77.11 Supplemental notice requirements. 

Subpart C—Standards for Determining 

Obstructions to Air Navigation or 

Navigational Aids or Facilities 

77.13 Applicability. 

77.15 Scope. 

77.17 Obstruction standards. 

77.19 Civil airport imaginary surfaces. 

77.21 Department of Defense (DOD) airport 

imaginary surfaces. 

77.23 Heliport imaginary surfaces. 

Subpart D—Aeronautical Studies and 

Determinations 

77.25 Applicability. 

77.27 Initiation of studies. 

77.29 Evaluating aeronautical effect. 

77.31 Determinations. 

77.33 Effective period of determinations. 

77.35 Extensions, terminations, revisions 

and corrections. 

Subpart E—Petitions for Discretionary 

Review 

77.37 General. 

77.39 Contents of a petition. 

77.41 Discretionary review results. 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106 (g), 40103, 40113– 

40114, 44502, 44701, 44718, 46101–46102, 

46104. 

Subpart A—General 

§ 77.1 Purpose. 

This part establishes: 

(a) The requirements to provide notice 

to the FAA of certain proposed 

construction, or the alteration of 

existing structures; 

(b) The standards used to determine 

obstructions to air navigation, and 

navigational and communication 

facilities; 

(c) The process for aeronautical 

studies of obstructions to air navigation 

or navigational facilities to determine 

the effect on the safe and efficient use 

of navigable airspace, air navigation 

facilities or equipment; and 

(d) The process to petition the FAA 

for discretionary review of 

determinations, revisions, and 

extensions of determinations. 

§ 77.3 Definitions. 

For the purpose of this part: 

Non-precision instrument runway 

means a runway having an existing 

instrument approach procedure 

utilizing air navigation facilities with 

only horizontal guidance, or area type 

navigation equipment, for which a 

straight-in non-precision instrument 

approach procedure has been approved, 

or planned, and for which no precision 

approach facilities are planned, or 

indicated on an FAA planning 

document or military service military 

airport planning document. 

Planned or proposed airport is an 

airport that is the subject of at least one 

of the following documents received by 

the FAA: 

(1) Airport proposals submitted under 

14 CFR part 157. 

(2) Airport Improvement Program 

requests for aid. 

(3) Notices of existing airports where 

prior notice of the airport construction 

or alteration was not provided as 

required by 14 CFR part 157. 

(4) Airport layout plans. 

(5) DOD proposals for airports used 

only by the U.S. Armed Forces. 

(6) DOD proposals on joint-use (civilmilitary) airports. 

(7) Completed airport site selection 

feasibility study. 

Precision instrument runway means a 

runway having an existing instrument 

approach procedure utilizing an 

Instrument Landing System (ILS), or a 

Precision Approach Radar (PAR). It also 

means a runway for which a precision 

approach system is planned and is so 

indicated by an FAA-approved airport 

layout plan; a military service approved 

military airport layout plan; any other 

FAA planning document, or military 

service military airport planning 

document. 

Public use airport is an airport 

available for use by the general public 

without a requirement for prior 

approval of the airport owner or 

operator. 

Seaplane base is considered to be an 

airport only if its sea lanes are outlined 

by visual markers. 

Utility runway means a runway that is 

constructed for and intended to be used 

by propeller driven aircraft of 12,500 

pounds maximum gross weight and less. 

Visual runway means a runway 

intended solely for the operation of 

aircraft using visual approach 

procedures, with no straight-in 

instrument approach procedure and no 

instrument designation indicated on an 

FAA-approved airport layout plan, a 

military service approved military 

airport layout plan, or by any planning 

document submitted to the FAA by 

competent authority. 

Subpart B—Notice Requirements 

§ 77.5 Applicability. 

(a) If you propose any construction or 

alteration described in § 77.9, you must 

provide adequate notice to the FAA of 

that construction or alteration. 

(b) If requested by the FAA, you must 

also file supplemental notice before the 

start date and upon completion of 

certain construction or alterations that 

are described in § 77.9. 

(c) Notice received by the FAA under 

this subpart is used to: 

(1) Evaluate the effect of the proposed 

construction or alteration on safety in 

air commerce and the efficient use and 

preservation of the navigable airspace 

and of airport traffic capacity at public 

use airports; 

(2) Determine whether the effect of 

proposed construction or alteration is a 

hazard to air navigation; 

(3) Determine appropriate marking 

and lighting recommendations, using 

FAA Advisory Circular 70/7460–1, 

Obstruction Marking and Lighting; 

(4) Determine other appropriate 

measures to be applied for continued 

safety of air navigation; and 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
42304 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

(5) Notify the aviation community of 

the construction or alteration of objects 

that affect the navigable airspace, 

including the revision of charts, when 

necessary. 

§ 77.7 Form and time of notice. 

(a) If you are required to file notice 

under § 77.9, you must submit to the 

FAA a completed FAA Form 7460–1, 

Notice of Proposed Construction or 

Alteration. FAA Form 7460–1 is 

available at FAA regional offices and on 

the Internet. 

(b) You must submit this form at least 

45 days before the start date of the 

proposed construction or alteration or 

the date an application for a 

construction permit is filed, whichever 

is earliest. 

(c) If you propose construction or 

alteration that is also subject to the 

licensing requirements of the Federal 

Communications Commission (FCC), 

you must submit notice to the FAA on 

or before the date that the application is 

filed with the FCC. 

(d) If you propose construction or 

alteration to an existing structure that 

exceeds 2,000 ft. in height above ground 

level (AGL), the FAA presumes it to be 

a hazard to air navigation that results in 

an inefficient use of airspace. You must 

include details explaining both why the 

proposal would not constitute a hazard 

to air navigation and why it would not 

cause an inefficient use of airspace. 

(e) The 45-day advance notice 

requirement is waived if immediate 

construction or alteration is required 

because of an emergency involving 

essential public services, public health, 

or public safety. You may provide 

notice to the FAA by any available, 

expeditious means. You must file a 

completed FAA Form 7460–1 within 5 

days of the initial notice to the FAA. 

Outside normal business hours, the 

nearest flight service station will accept 

emergency notices. 

§ 77.9 Construction or alteration requiring 

notice. 

If requested by the FAA, or if you 

propose any of the following types of 

construction or alteration, you must file 

notice with the FAA of: 

(a) Any construction or alteration that 

is more than 200 ft. AGL at its site. 

(b) Any construction or alteration that 

exceeds an imaginary surface extending 

outward and upward at any of the 

following slopes: 

(1) 100 to 1 for a horizontal distance 

of 20,000 ft. from the nearest point of 

the nearest runway of each airport 

described in paragraph (d) of this 

section with its longest runway more 

than 3,200 ft. in actual length, excluding 

heliports. 

(2) 50 to 1 for a horizontal distance of 

10,000 ft. from the nearest point of the 

nearest runway of each airport 

described in paragraph (d) of this 

section with its longest runway no more 

than 3,200 ft. in actual length, excluding 

heliports. 

(3) 25 to 1 for a horizontal distance of 

5,000 ft. from the nearest point of the 

nearest landing and takeoff area of each 

heliport described in paragraph (d) of 

this section. 

(c) Any highway, railroad, or other 

traverse way for mobile objects, of a 

height which, if adjusted upward 17 feet 

for an Interstate Highway that is part of 

the National System of Military and 

Interstate Highways where 

overcrossings are designed for a 

minimum of 17 feet vertical distance, 15 

feet for any other public roadway, 10 

feet or the height of the highest mobile 

object that would normally traverse the 

road, whichever is greater, for a private 

road, 23 feet for a railroad, and for a 

waterway or any other traverse way not 

previously mentioned, an amount equal 

to the height of the highest mobile 

object that would normally traverse it, 

would exceed a standard of paragraph 

(a) or (b) of this section. 

(d) Any construction or alteration on 

any of the following airports and 

heliports: 

(1) A public use airport listed in the 

Airport/Facility Directory, Alaska 

Supplement, or Pacific Chart 

Supplement of the U.S. Government 

Flight Information Publications; 

(2) A military airport under 

construction, or an airport under 

construction that will be available for 

public use; 

(3) An airport operated by a Federal 

agency or the DOD. 

(4) An airport or heliport with at least 

one FAA-approved instrument approach 

procedure. 

(e) You do not need to file notice for 

construction or alteration of: 

(1) Any object that will be shielded by 

existing structures of a permanent and 

substantial nature or by natural terrain 

or topographic features of equal or 

greater height, and will be located in the 

congested area of a city, town, or 

settlement where the shielded structure 

will not adversely affect safety in air 

navigation; 

(2) Any air navigation facility, airport 

visual approach or landing aid, aircraft 

arresting device, or meteorological 

device meeting FAA-approved siting 

criteria or an appropriate military 

service siting criteria on military 

airports, the location and height of 

which are fixed by its functional 

purpose; 

(3) Any construction or alteration for 

which notice is required by any other 

FAA regulation. 

(4) Any antenna structure of 20 feet or 

less in height, except one that would 

increase the height of another antenna 

structure. 

§ 77.11 Supplemental notice requirements. 

(a) You must file supplemental notice 

with the FAA when: 

(1) The construction or alteration is 

more than 200 feet in height AGL at its 

site; or 

(2) Requested by the FAA. 

(b) You must file supplemental notice 

on a prescribed FAA form to be received 

within the time limits specified in the 

FAA determination. If no time limit has 

been specified, you must submit 

supplemental notice of construction to 

the FAA within 5 days after the 

structure reaches its greatest height. 

(c) If you abandon a construction or 

alteration proposal that requires 

supplemental notice, you must submit 

notice to the FAA within 5 days after 

the project is abandoned. 

(d) If the construction or alteration is 

dismantled or destroyed, you must 

submit notice to the FAA within 5 days 

after the construction or alteration is 

dismantled or destroyed. 

Subpart C—Standards for Determining 

Obstructions to Air Navigation or 

Navigational Aids or Facilities 

§ 77.13 Applicability. 

This subpart describes the standards 

used for determining obstructions to air 

navigation, navigational aids, or 

navigational facilities. These standards 

apply to the following: 

(a) Any object of natural growth, 

terrain, or permanent or temporary 

construction or alteration, including 

equipment or materials used and any 

permanent or temporary apparatus. 

(b) The alteration of any permanent or 

temporary existing structure by a change 

in its height, including appurtenances, 

or lateral dimensions, including 

equipment or material used therein. 

§ 77.15 Scope. 

(a) This subpart describes standards 

used to determine obstructions to air 

navigation that may affect the safe and 

efficient use of navigable airspace and 

the operation of planned or existing air 

navigation and communication 

facilities. Such facilities include air 

navigation aids, communication 

equipment, airports, Federal airways, 

instrument approach or departure 

procedures, and approved off-airway 

routes. 

(b) Objects that are considered 

obstructions under the standards 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 42305 

described in this subpart are presumed 

hazards to air navigation unless further 

aeronautical study concludes that the 

object is not a hazard. Once further 

aeronautical study has been initiated, 

the FAA will use the standards in this 

subpart, along with FAA policy and 

guidance material, to determine if the 

object is a hazard to air navigation. 

(c) The FAA will apply these 

standards with reference to an existing 

airport facility, and airport proposals 

received by the FAA, or the appropriate 

military service, before it issues a final 

determination. 

(d) For airports having defined 

runways with specially prepared hard 

surfaces, the primary surface for each 

runway extends 200 feet beyond each 

end of the runway. For airports having 

defined strips or pathways used 

regularly for aircraft takeoffs and 

landings, and designated runways, 

without specially prepared hard 

surfaces, each end of the primary 

surface for each such runway shall 

coincide with the corresponding end of 

the runway. At airports, excluding 

seaplane bases, having a defined 

landing and takeoff area with no defined 

pathways for aircraft takeoffs and 

landings, a determination must be made 

as to which portions of the landing and 

takeoff area are regularly used as 

landing and takeoff pathways. Those 

determined pathways must be 

considered runways, and an appropriate 

primary surface as defined in § 77.19 

will be considered as longitudinally 

centered on each such runway. Each 

end of that primary surface must 

coincide with the corresponding end of 

that runway. 

(e) The standards in this subpart 

apply to construction or alteration 

proposals on an airport (including 

heliports and seaplane bases with 

marked lanes) if that airport is one of 

the following before the issuance of the 

final determination: 

(1) Available for public use and is 

listed in the Airport/Facility Directory, 

Supplement Alaska, or Supplement 

Pacific of the U.S. Government Flight 

Information Publications; or 

(2) A planned or proposed airport or 

an airport under construction of which 

the FAA has received actual notice, 

except DOD airports, where there is a 

clear indication the airport will be 

available for public use; or, 

(3) An airport operated by a Federal 

agency or the DOD; or, 

(4) An airport that has at least one 

FAA-approved instrument approach. 

§ 77.17 Obstruction standards. 

(a) An existing object, including a 

mobile object, is, and a future object 

would be an obstruction to air 

navigation if it is of greater height than 

any of the following heights or surfaces: 

(1) A height of 499 feet AGL at the site 

of the object. 

(2) A height that is 200 feet AGL, or 

above the established airport elevation, 

whichever is higher, within 3 nautical 

miles of the established reference point 

of an airport, excluding heliports, with 

its longest runway more than 3,200 feet 

in actual length, and that height 

increases in the proportion of 100 feet 

for each additional nautical mile from 

the airport up to a maximum of 499 feet. 

(3) A height within a terminal 

obstacle clearance area, including an 

initial approach segment, a departure 

area, and a circling approach area, 

which would result in the vertical 

distance between any point on the 

object and an established minimum 

instrument flight altitude within that 

area or segment to be less than the 

required obstacle clearance. 

(4) A height within an en route 

obstacle clearance area, including turn 

and termination areas, of a Federal 

Airway or approved off-airway route, 

that would increase the minimum 

obstacle clearance altitude. 

(5) The surface of a takeoff and 

landing area of an airport or any 

imaginary surface established under 

§ 77.19, 77.21, or 77.23. However, no 

part of the takeoff or landing area itself 

will be considered an obstruction. 

(b) Except for traverse ways on or near 

an airport with an operative ground 

traffic control service furnished by an 

airport traffic control tower or by the 

airport management and coordinated 

with the air traffic control service, the 

standards of paragraph (a) of this section 

apply to traverse ways used or to be 

used for the passage of mobile objects 

only after the heights of these traverse 

ways are increased by: 

(1) 17 feet for an Interstate Highway 

that is part of the National System of 

Military and Interstate Highways where 

overcrossings are designed for a 

minimum of 17 feet vertical distance. 

(2) 15 feet for any other public 

roadway. 

(3) 10 feet or the height of the highest 

mobile object that would normally 

traverse the road, whichever is greater, 

for a private road. 

(4) 23 feet for a railroad. 

(5) For a waterway or any other 

traverse way not previously mentioned, 

an amount equal to the height of the 

highest mobile object that would 

normally traverse it. 

§ 77.19 Civil airport imaginary surfaces. 

The following civil airport imaginary 

surfaces are established with relation to 

the airport and to each runway. The size 

of each such imaginary surface is based 

on the category of each runway 

according to the type of approach 

available or planned for that runway. 

The slope and dimensions of the 

approach surface applied to each end of 

a runway are determined by the most 

precise approach procedure existing or 

planned for that runway end. 

(a) Horizontal surface. A horizontal 

plane 150 feet above the established 

airport elevation, the perimeter of which 

is constructed by SW.inging arcs of a 

specified radii from the center of each 

end of the primary surface of each 

runway of each airport and connecting 

the adjacent arcs by lines tangent to 

those arcs. The radius of each arc is: 

(1) 5,000 feet for all runways 

designated as utility or visual; 

(2) 10,000 feet for all other runways. 

The radius of the arc specified for each 

end of a runway will have the same 

arithmetical value. That value will be 

the highest determined for either end of 

the runway. When a 5,000-foot arc is 

encompassed by tangents connecting 

two adjacent 10,000-foot arcs, the 5,000- 

foot arc shall be disregarded on the 

construction of the perimeter of the 

horizontal surface. 

(b) Conical surface. A surface 

extending outward and upward from the 

periphery of the horizontal surface at a 

slope of 20 to 1 for a horizontal distance 

of 4,000 feet. 

(c) Primary surface. A surface 

longitudinally centered on a runway. 

When the runway has a specially 

prepared hard surface, the primary 

surface extends 200 feet beyond each 

end of that runway; but when the 

runway has no specially prepared hard 

surface, the primary surface ends at 

each end of that runway. The elevation 

of any point on the primary surface is 

the same as the elevation of the nearest 

point on the runway centerline. The 

width of the primary surface is: 

(1) 250 feet for utility runways having 

only visual approaches. 

(2) 500 feet for utility runways having 

non-precision instrument approaches. 

(3) For other than utility runways, the 

width is: 

(i) 500 feet for visual runways having 

only visual approaches. 

(ii) 500 feet for non-precision 

instrument runways having visibility 

minimums greater than three-fourths 

statue mile. 

(iii) 1,000 feet for a non-precision 

instrument runway having a nonprecision instrument approach with 

visibility minimums as low as threefourths of a statute mile, and for 

precision instrument runways. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
42306 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

(iv) The width of the primary surface 

of a runway will be that width 

prescribed in this section for the most 

precise approach existing or planned for 

either end of that runway. 

(d) Approach surface. A surface 

longitudinally centered on the extended 

runway centerline and extending 

outward and upward from each end of 

the primary surface. An approach 

surface is applied to each end of each 

runway based upon the type of 

approach available or planned for that 

runway end. 

(1) The inner edge of the approach 

surface is the same width as the primary 

surface and it expands uniformly to a 

width of: 

(i) 1,250 feet for that end of a utility 

runway with only visual approaches; 

(ii) 1,500 feet for that end of a runway 

other than a utility runway with only 

visual approaches; 

(iii) 2,000 feet for that end of a utility 

runway with a non-precision instrument 

approach; 

(iv) 3,500 feet for that end of a nonprecision instrument runway other than 

utility, having visibility minimums 

greater that three-fourths of a statute 

mile; 

(v) 4,000 feet for that end of a nonprecision instrument runway, other than 

utility, having a non-precision 

instrument approach with visibility 

minimums as low as three-fourths 

statute mile; and 

(vi) 16,000 feet for precision 

instrument runways. 

(2) The approach surface extends for 

a horizontal distance of: 

(i) 5,000 feet at a slope of 20 to 1 for 

all utility and visual runways; 

(ii) 10,000 feet at a slope of 34 to 1 

for all non-precision instrument 

runways other than utility; and 

(iii) 10,000 feet at a slope of 50 to 1 

with an additional 40,000 feet at a slope 

of 40 to 1 for all precision instrument 

runways. 

(3) The outer width of an approach 

surface to an end of a runway will be 

that width prescribed in this subsection 

for the most precise approach existing 

or planned for that runway end. 

(e) Transitional surface. These 

surfaces extend outward and upward at 

right angles to the runway centerline 

and the runway centerline extended at 

a slope of 7 to 1 from the sides of the 

primary surface and from the sides of 

the approach surfaces. Transitional 

surfaces for those portions of the 

precision approach surface which 

project through and beyond the limits of 

the conical surface, extend a distance of 

5,000 feet measured horizontally from 

the edge of the approach surface and at 

right angles to the runway centerline. 

§ 77.21 Department of Defense (DOD) 

airport imaginary surfaces. 

(a) Related to airport reference points. 

These surfaces apply to all military 

airports. For the purposes of this 

section, a military airport is any airport 

operated by the DOD. 

(1) Inner horizontal surface. A plane 

that is oval in shape at a height of 150 

feet above the established airfield 

elevation. The plane is constructed by 

scribing an arc with a radius of 7,500 

feet about the centerline at the end of 

each runway and interconnecting these 

arcs with tangents. 

(2) Conical surface. A surface 

extending from the periphery of the 

inner horizontal surface outward and 

upward at a slope of 20 to 1 for a 

horizontal distance of 7,000 feet to a 

height of 500 feet above the established 

airfield elevation. 

(3) Outer horizontal surface. A plane, 

located 500 feet above the established 

airfield elevation, extending outward 

from the outer periphery of the conical 

surface for a horizontal distance of 

30,000 feet. 

(b) Related to runways. These surfaces 

apply to all military airports. 

(1) Primary surface. A surface located 

on the ground or water longitudinally 

centered on each runway with the same 

length as the runway. The width of the 

primary surface for runways is 2,000 

feet. However, at established bases 

where substantial construction has 

taken place in accordance with a 

previous lateral clearance criteria, the 

2,000-foot width may be reduced to the 

former criteria. 

(2) Clear zone surface. A surface 

located on the ground or water at each 

end of the primary surface, with a 

length of 1,000 feet and the same width 

as the primary surface. 

(3) Approach clearance surface. An 

inclined plane, symmetrical about the 

runway centerline extended, beginning 

200 feet beyond each end of the primary 

surface at the centerline elevation of the 

runway end and extending for 50,000 

feet. The slope of the approach 

clearance surface is 50 to 1 along the 

runway centerline extended until it 

reaches an elevation of 500 feet above 

the established airport elevation. It then 

continues horizontally at this elevation 

to a point 50,000 feet from the point of 

beginning. The width of this surface at 

the runway end is the same as the 

primary surface, it flares uniformly, and 

the width at 50,000 is 16,000 feet. 

(4) Transitional surfaces. These 

surfaces connect the primary surfaces, 

the first 200 feet of the clear zone 

surfaces, and the approach clearance 

surfaces to the inner horizontal surface, 

conical surface, outer horizontal surface 

or other transitional surfaces. The slope 

of the transitional surface is 7 to 1 

outward and upward at right angles to 

the runway centerline. 

§ 77.23 Heliport imaginary surfaces. 

(a) Primary surface. The area of the 

primary surface coincides in size and 

shape with the designated take-off and 

landing area. This surface is a horizontal 

plane at the elevation of the established 

heliport elevation. 

(b) Approach surface. The approach 

surface begins at each end of the 

heliport primary surface with the same 

width as the primary surface, and 

extends outward and upward for a 

horizontal distance of 4,000 feet where 

its width is 500 feet. The slope of the 

approach surface is 8 to 1 for civil 

heliports and 10 to 1 for military 

heliports. 

(c) Transitional surfaces. These 

surfaces extend outward and upward 

from the lateral boundaries of the 

primary surface and from the approach 

surfaces at a slope of 2 to 1 for a 

distance of 250 feet measured 

horizontally from the centerline of the 

primary and approach surfaces. 

Subpart D—Aeronautical Studies and 

Determinations 

§ 77.25 Applicability. 

(a) This subpart applies to any 

aeronautical study of a proposed 

construction or alteration for which 

notice to the FAA is required under 

§ 77.9. 

(b) The purpose of an aeronautical 

study is to determine whether the 

aeronautical effects of the specific 

proposal and, where appropriate, the 

cumulative impact resulting from the 

proposed construction or alteration 

when combined with the effects of other 

existing or proposed structures, would 

constitute a hazard to air navigation. 

(c) The obstruction standards in 

subpart C of this part are supplemented 

by other manuals and directives used in 

determining the effect on the navigable 

airspace of a proposed construction or 

alteration. When the FAA needs 

additional information, it may circulate 

a study to interested parties for 

comment. 

§ 77.27 Initiation of studies. 

The FAA will conduct an aeronautical 

study when: 

(a) Requested by the sponsor of any 

proposed construction or alteration for 

which a notice is submitted; or 

(b) The FAA determines a study is 

necessary. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 42307 

§ 77.29 Evaluating aeronautical effect. 

(a) The FAA conducts an aeronautical 

study to determine the impact of a 

proposed structure, an existing structure 

that has not yet been studied by the 

FAA, or an alteration of an existing 

structure on aeronautical operations, 

procedures, and the safety of flight. 

These studies include evaluating: 

(1) The impact on arrival, departure, 

and en route procedures for aircraft 

operating under visual flight rules; 

(2) The impact on arrival, departure, 

and en route procedures for aircraft 

operating under instrument flight rules; 

(3) The impact on existing and 

planned public use airports; 

(4) Airport traffic capacity of existing 

public use airports and public use 

airport development plans received 

before the issuance of the final 

determination; 

(5) Minimum obstacle clearance 

altitudes, minimum instrument flight 

rules altitudes, approved or planned 

instrument approach procedures, and 

departure procedures; 

(6) The potential effect on ATC radar, 

direction finders, ATC tower line-ofsight visibility, and physical or 

electromagnetic effects on air 

navigation, communication facilities, 

and other surveillance systems; 

(7) The aeronautical effects resulting 

from the cumulative impact of a 

proposed construction or alteration of a 

structure when combined with the 

effects of other existing or proposed 

structures. 

(b) If you withdraw the proposed 

construction or alteration or revise it so 

that it is no longer identified as an 

obstruction, or if no further aeronautical 

study is necessary, the FAA may 

terminate the study. 

§ 77.31 Determinations. 

(a) The FAA will issue a 

determination stating whether the 

proposed construction or alteration 

would be a hazard to air navigation, and 

will advise all known interested 

persons. 

(b) The FAA will make 

determinations based on the 

aeronautical study findings and will 

identify the following: 

(1) The effects on VFR/IFR 

aeronautical departure/arrival 

operations, air traffic procedures, 

minimum flight altitudes, and existing, 

planned, or proposed airports listed in 

§ 77.15(e) of which the FAA has 

received actual notice prior to issuance 

of a final determination. 

(2) The extent of the physical and/or 

electromagnetic effect on the operation 

of existing or proposed air navigation 

facilities, communication aids, or 

surveillance systems. 

(c) The FAA will issue a 

Determination of Hazard to Air 

Navigation when the aeronautical study 

concludes that the proposed 

construction or alteration will exceed an 

obstruction standard and would have a 

substantial aeronautical impact. 

(d) A Determination of No Hazard to 

Air Navigation will be issued when the 

aeronautical study concludes that the 

proposed construction or alteration will 

exceed an obstruction standard but 

would not have a substantial 

aeronautical impact to air navigation. A 

Determination of No Hazard to Air 

Navigation may include the following: 

(1) Conditional provisions of a 

determination. 

(2) Limitations necessary to minimize 

potential problems, such as the use of 

temporary construction equipment. 

(3) Supplemental notice requirements, 

when required. 

(4) Marking and lighting 

recommendations, as appropriate. 

(e) The FAA will issue a 

Determination of No Hazard to Air 

Navigation when a proposed structure 

does not exceed any of the obstruction 

standards and would not be a hazard to 

air navigation. 

§ 77.33 Effective period of determinations. 

(a) A determination issued under this 

subpart is effective 40 days after the 

date of issuance, unless a petition for 

discretionary review is received by the 

FAA within 30 days after issuance. The 

determination will not become final 

pending disposition of a petition for 

discretionary review. 

(b) Unless extended, revised, or 

terminated, each Determination of No 

Hazard to Air Navigation issued under 

this subpart expires 18 months after the 

effective date of the determination, or 

on the date the proposed construction or 

alteration is abandoned, whichever is 

earlier. 

(c) A Determination of Hazard to Air 

Navigation has no expiration date. 

§ 77.35 Extensions, terminations, 

revisions and corrections. 

(a) You may petition the FAA official 

that issued the Determination of No 

Hazard to Air Navigation to revise or 

reconsider the determination based on 

new facts or to extend the effective 

period of the determination, provided 

that: 

(1) Actual structural work of the 

proposed construction or alteration, 

such as the laying of a foundation, but 

not including excavation, has not been 

started; and 

(2) The petition is submitted at least 

15 days before the expiration date of the 

Determination of No Hazard to Air 

Navigation. 

(b) A Determination of No Hazard to 

Air Navigation issued for those 

construction or alteration proposals not 

requiring an FCC construction permit 

may be extended by the FAA one time 

for a period not to exceed 18 months. 

(c) A Determination of No Hazard to 

Air Navigation issued for a proposal 

requiring an FCC construction permit 

may be granted extensions for up to 18 

months, provided that: 

(1) You submit evidence that an 

application for a construction permit/ 

license was filed with the FCC for the 

associated site within 6 months of 

issuance of the determination; and 

(2) You submit evidence that 

additional time is warranted because of 

FCC requirements; and 

(3) Where the FCC issues a 

construction permit, a final 

Determination of No Hazard to Air 

Navigation is effective until the date 

prescribed by the FCC for completion of 

the construction. If an extension of the 

original FCC completion date is needed, 

an extension of the FAA determination 

must be requested from the Obstruction 

Evaluation Service (OES). 

(4) If the Commission refuses to issue 

a construction permit, the final 

determination expires on the date of its 

refusal. 

Subpart E—Petitions for Discretionary 

Review 

§ 77.37 General. 

(a) If you are the sponsor, provided a 

substantive aeronautical comment on a 

proposal in an aeronautical study, or 

have a substantive aeronautical 

comment on the proposal but were not 

given an opportunity to state it, you may 

petition the FAA for a discretionary 

review of a determination, revision, or 

extension of a determination issued by 

the FAA. 

(b) You may not file a petition for 

discretionary review for a Determination 

of No Hazard that is issued for a 

temporary structure, marking and 

lighting recommendation, or when a 

proposed structure or alteration does 

not exceed obstruction standards 

contained in subpart C of this part. 

§ 77.39 Contents of a petition. 

(a) You must file a petition for 

discretionary review in writing and it 

must be received by the FAA within 30 

days after the issuance of a 

determination under § 77.31, or a 

revision or extension of the 

determination under § 77.35. 

(b) The petition must contain a full 

statement of the aeronautical basis on 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
42308 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

which the petition is made, and must 

include new information or facts not 

previously considered or presented 

during the aeronautical study, including 

valid aeronautical reasons why the 

determination, revisions, or extension 

made by the FAA should be reviewed. 

(c) In the event that the last day of the 

30-day filing period falls on a weekend 

or a day the Federal government is 

closed, the last day of the filing period 

is the next day that the government is 

open. 

(d) The FAA will inform the 

petitioner or sponsor (if other than the 

petitioner) and the FCC (whenever an 

FCC-related proposal is involved) of the 

filing of the petition and that the 

determination is not final pending 

disposition of the petition. 

§ 77.41 Discretionary review results. 

(a) If discretionary review is granted, 

the FAA will inform the petitioner and 

the sponsor (if other than the petitioner) 

of the issues to be studied and reviewed. 

The review may include a request for 

comments and a review of all records 

from the initial aeronautical study. 

(b) If discretionary review is denied, 

the FAA will notify the petitioner and 

the sponsor (if other than the 

petitioner), and the FCC, whenever a 

FCC-related proposal is involved, of the 

basis for the denial along with a 

statement that the determination is 

final. 

(c) After concluding the discretionary 

review process, the FAA will revise, 

affirm, or reverse the determination. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on July 13, 

2010. 

J. Randolph Babbitt, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2010–17767 Filed 7–20–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 97 

[Docket No. 30734; Amdt. No. 3382] 

Standard Instrument Approach 

Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums 

and Obstacle Departure Procedures; 

Miscellaneous Amendments 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This establishes, amends, 

suspends, or revokes Standard 

Instrument Approach Procedures 

(SIAPs) and associated Takeoff 

Minimums and Obstacle Departure 

Procedures for operations at certain 

airports. These regulatory actions are 

needed because of the adoption of new 

or revised criteria, or because of changes 

occurring in the National Airspace 

System, such as the commissioning of 

new navigational facilities, adding new 

obstacles, or changing air traffic 

requirements. These changes are 

designed to provide safe and efficient 

use of the navigable airspace and to 

promote safe flight operations under 

instrument flight rules at the affected 

airports. 

DATES: This rule is effective July 21, 

2010. The compliance date for each 

SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, 

and ODP is specified in the amendatory 

provisions. 

The incorporation by reference of 

certain publications listed in the 

regulations is approved by the Director 

of the Federal Register as of July 21, 

2010. 

ADDRESSES: Availability of matters 

incorporated by reference in the 

amendment is as follows: 

For Examination— 

1. FAA Rules Docket, FAA 

Headquarters Building, 800 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20591; 

2. The FAA Regional Office of the 

region in which the affected airport is 

located; 

3. The National Flight Procedures 

Office, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., 

Oklahoma City, OK 73169; or 

4. The National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). For 

information on the availability of this 

material at NARA, call 202–741–6030, 

or go to: http://www.archives.gov/ 

federal_register/ 

code_of_federal_regulations/ 

ibr_locations.html. 

Availability—All SIAPs and Takeoff 

Minimums and ODPs are available 

online free of charge. Visit http:// 

www.nfdc.faa.gov to register. 

Additionally, individual SIAP and 

Takeoff Minimums and ODP copies may 

be obtained from: 

1. FAA Public Inquiry Center (APA– 

200), FAA Headquarters Building, 800 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20591; or 

2. The FAA Regional Office of the 

region in which the affected airport is 

located. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Harry J. Hodges, Flight Procedure 

Standards Branch (AFS–420), Flight 

Technologies and Programs Divisions, 

Flight Standards Service, Federal 

Aviation Administration, Mike 

Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 

South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, 

OK 73169 (Mail Address: P.O. Box 

25082, Oklahoma City, OK 73125) 

Telephone: (405) 954–4164. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule 

amends Title 14 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97), by 

establishing, amending, suspending, or 

revoking SIAPS, Takeoff Minimums 

and/or ODPS. The complete regulators 

description of each SIAP and its 

associated Takeoff Minimums or ODP 

for an identified airport is listed on FAA 

form documents which are incorporated 

by reference in this amendment under 5 

U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and 14 

CFR part 97.20. The applicable FAA 

Forms are FAA Forms 8260–3, 8260–4, 

8260–5, 8260–15A, and 8260–15B when 

required by an entry on 8260–15A. 

The large number of SIAPs, Takeoff 

Minimums and ODPs, in addition to 

their complex nature and the need for 

a special format make publication in the 

Federal Register expensive and 

impractical. Furthermore, airmen do not 

use the regulatory text of the SIAPs, 

Takeoff Minimums or ODPs, but instead 

refer to their depiction on charts printed 

by publishers of aeronautical materials. 

The advantages of incorporation by 

reference are realized and publication of 

the complete description of each SIAP, 

Takeoff Minimums and ODP listed on 

FAA forms is unnecessary. This 

amendment provides the affected CFR 

sections and specifies the types of SIAPs 

and the effective dates of the associated 

Takeoff Minimums and ODPs. This 

amendment also identifies the airport 

and its location, the procedure, and the 

amendment number. 

The Rule 

This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is 

effective upon publication of each 

separate SIAP, Takeoff Minimums and 

ODP as contained in the transmittal. 

Some SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and 

textual ODP amendments may have 

been issued previously by the FAA in a 

Flight Data Center (FDC) Notice to 

Airmen (NOTAM) as an emergency 

action of immediate flight safety relating 

directly to published aeronautical 

charts. The circumstances which 

created the need for some SIAP and 

Takeoff Minimums and ODP 

amendments may require making them 

effective in less than 30 days. For the 

remaining SIAPS and Takeoff 

Minimums and ODPS, an effective date 

at least 30 days after publication is 

provided. 

Further, the SIAPs and Takeoff 

Minimums and ODPS contained in this 

amendment are based on the criteria 

contained in the U.S. Standard for 

Terminal Instrument Procedures 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES