Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 13 / Tuesday, January 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 3305 

TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (e)—Continued 

P/N Part description 

S–70, S–70A, 

S–70C service 

life 

UH–60M 

service life 

SH–60B/F 

service life 

70400–08115–043, –045, –046, and –047 .... Left Tie Rod Assembly ................................... 14,000 4,600 6,300 

70400–08162–042 .......................................... Forward Bellcrank Support Assembly ............ 14,000/2,500 3 5,600 7,600 

70400–08166–041 .......................................... Lateral Servo Bellcrank .................................. 20,000 11,000 14,000 

70410–06520–044 through –046 .................... Tail Rotor Servo Assembly ............................ 15,000 11,000 1 N/A 

1There is no service life limit listed because the parts on Model SH–60B/F have a different P/N than the parts on Models S–70, S–70A, and 

S–70C. 2For serial number (S/N) 32479930 through 324791859, with CAGE code 60078, the life limit is 1,300 hours TIS. 

For S/N A241–07543 through A241–07594, A241–07706 through A241–07755, A241–07768 through A241–07771, A241–07800 through 

A241–07831, R241–00101 through R241–00355, R241–00701 through R241–00966, and R241–01001 through R241–01166, the life limit is 

2,500 hours TIS. 3For S/N A–367–00001 through A367–00035, with CAGE code 78286, the life limit is 2,500 hours TIS. 

(iii) Record the newly-established life limit 

of each part on the part’s component log card 

or equivalent record. 

(2) After establishing the new life limit, 

replace each part that has reached or 

exceeded its new life limit with an airworthy 

part before further flight. 

(3) Do not install the following parts on a 

Model S–70, S–70A, or S–70C helicopter if 

they have been previously installed on a 

Model UH–60M helicopter: 

(i) Bolt, self retaining, P/N 70103–08801– 

102; 

(ii) Bifilar, P/N 70107–08400–046; 

(iii) Aft Bellcrank, P/N 70400–08102–045; 

(iv) Aft Walking Beam Assembly, P/N 

70400–08104–048; or 

(v) Close Tolerance Bolt, P/N 70400– 

26802–102 and –103. 

(f) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOC) 

(1) The Manager, Boston Aircraft 

Certification Office, FAA, may approve 

AMOCs for this AD. Send your proposal to: 

Michael Davison, Flight Test Engineer, 

Boston Aircraft Certification Office, Engine & 

Propeller Directorate, 12 New England 

Executive Park, Burlington, Massachusetts 

01803; telephone (781) 238–7156; email 

michael.davison@faa.gov. 

(2) For operations conducted under a 14 

CFR part 119 operating certificate or under 

14 CFR part 91, subpart K, we suggest that 

you notify your principal inspector, or 

lacking a principal inspector, the manager of 

the local flight standards district office or 

certificate holding district office before 

operating any aircraft complying with this 

AD through an AMOC. 

(g) Subject 

Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) 

Code: 6220 Main Rotor Hub, 6230 Main Rotor 

Mast/Swashplate, 6320 Main Rotor Gearbox, 

6310 Engine/Transmission Coupling, 6510 

Tail Rotor Drive Shaft. 

(h) Material Incorporated by Reference 

(1) The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

(IBR) of the service information listed in this 

paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR 

part 51. 

(2) You must use this service information 

as applicable to do the actions required by 

this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. 

(i) Pages 1–25 and 1–26, Section 1.1.3, 

Component Life Prorating, of Sikorsky 

Technical Manual TM 1–70–23AW–2, 

Change 3, dated April 15, 2012. 

(ii) Reserved. 

(3) For Sikorsky service information 

identified in this AD, contact Sikorsky 

Aircraft Corporation, Customer Service 

Engineering, 124 Quarry Road, Trumbull, CT 

06611; telephone 1–800–Winged–S or 203– 

416–4299; email sikorskywcs@sikorsky.com. 

(4) You may view this service information 

at FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, 

Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., 

Room 663, Fort Worth, Texas 76137. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call (817) 222–5110. 

(5) You may view this service information 

that is incorporated by reference at 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/cfr/ibrlocations.html. 

Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on December 

5, 2013. 

Kim Smith, 

Directorate Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2013–31459 Filed 1–17–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 71 

[Docket No. FAA–2012–0661; Airspace 

Docket No. 09–AWA–4] 

RIN 2120–AA66 

Amendment to Class B Airspace; 

Detroit, MI 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This action modifies the 

Detroit, MI, Class B airspace area to 

contain aircraft conducting published 

instrument procedures at Detroit 

Metropolitan Wayne County Airport 

(DTW), Detroit, MI, within Class B 

airspace. The FAA is taking this action 

to support containment of aircraft 

operations using the three existing dual 

Simultaneous Independent Instrument 

Landing System (SIILS) configurations, 

runways 22R/21L, runways 4L/3R and 

runways 27L/27R, as well as support 

containment of aircraft operations for 

triple SIILS operations to runways 4L/ 

4R/3R and runways 21L/22L/22R. This 

action will enhance safety, improve the 

flow of air traffic, and reduce the 

potential for midair collisions in the 

DTW terminal area, while 

accommodating the concerns of all 

airspace users. Furthermore, this effort 

supports the FAA’s national airspace 

redesign goal of optimizing terminal and 

enroute airspace areas to reduce aircraft 

delays and improve system capacity. 

DATES: Effective Date: 0901 UTC, April 

3, 2014. The Director of the Federal 

Register approves this incorporation by 

reference action under 3 CFR part 51, 

subject to the annual revision of FAA 

Order 7400.9 and publication of 

conforming amendments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Colby Abbott, Airspace Policy and 

Regulations Group, Office of Airspace 

Services, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone: (202) 267–8783. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

History 

On August 14, 2012, the FAA 

published in the Federal Register a 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

to modify the Detroit Class B airspace 

area (77 FR 48476). This action 

proposed to expand the lateral and 

vertical limits of the Detroit Class B 

airspace area to provide additional 

airspace needed to contain dual SIILS 

procedures and associated traffic 

patterns supporting runways 22R/21L, 

runways 4L/3R, and runways 27L/27R 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
3306 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 13 / Tuesday, January 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

simultaneous operations within Class B 

airspace. The action also supports 

airspace requirements necessary for 

planned triple SIILS procedures and 

associated traffic patterns to runways 

4L/4R/3R and runways 21L/22L/22R 

operations within Class B airspace. 

In addition, the FAA published in the 

Federal Register a document correcting 

the 5-mile arc of the DXO VOR/DME 

boundary reference information 

published in the Areas C, D, and E 

regulatory text descriptions to the 15- 

mile arc of the DXO VOR/DME (77 FR 

53159, August 31, 2012). Interested 

parties were invited to participate in 

this rulemaking effort by submitting 

written comments on the proposed 

action. Twenty-three written comments 

were received in response to the notice. 

The FAA considered all substantive 

comments received before making a 

determination on this final rule. 

Discussion of Comments 

One commenter suggested that the 

meetings associated with Detroit Class B 

airspace modification were held in 

secret, and without notice to the general 

public. The commenter stated the 

groups that attended were specifically 

invited and were not representing the 

interests of the flight schools in the area 

impacted by the proposed changes. 

The FAA considers the comment to be 

specific to the Ad Hoc Committee 

process the FAA follows during the 

initial airspace design phase prior to the 

initiation of rulemaking. To ensure local 

user needs and suggestions are 

considered during the initial airspace 

design phase, an Ad Hoc Committee is 

formed. The Ad Hoc Committee’s 

purpose is to obtain suggestions from a 

cross section of users and aviation 

organizations that could be affected by 

a proposed airspace change before the 

FAA develops a proposed airspace 

design. The committee makeup and size 

is determined by the local situation or 

requirements and includes 

representatives of local users and 

aviation organizations. 

As noted in the NPRM in the 

Discussion of Ad Hoc Committee 

Recommendations and Comments 

section, the interests of the flight 

schools were represented by the Ad Hoc 

Committee. The committee made 

recommendations to the FAA 

addressing the western boundary 

remaining basically unchanged in 

support of outlaying airports, glider 

activities, and parachute operations; an 

ATC advisory service to VFR pilots in 

areas of intensive flight training; and 

boundary changes to maintain the 

ability to fly practice approaches at 

airports without the need for Class B 

airspace services. 

Additionally, the FAA hosted three 

informal airspace meetings for the 

general public on July 20, 21, and 22, 

2010, that were intended to inform the 

general public, affected airspace users, 

and aviation organizations of the 

proposed airspace changes and to gather 

facts and information relevant to the 

planned regulatory action. The FAA 

published notice of the meetings in the 

Federal Register (May 13, 2010; 75 FR 

11496) and mailed 14,852 informal 

airspace meeting notification letters to 

all registered pilots that resided within 

100 miles of DTW. As a result, the FAA 

received comments from 29 individuals. 

Five commenters addressed public 

involvement in the regulatory process 

proposing to modify the DTW Class B 

airspace. One commenter praised the 

FAA’s decision to limit western 

expansion of the DTW Class B airspace 

contained in the proposal following 

industry and community input. 

Conversely, four other commenters 

believed the FAA largely ignored the 

concerns and recommendations of the 

Ad Hoc Committee and public in 

developing the proposed DTW Class B 

airspace modification. In general, they 

argued that the FAA was going through 

the motions of gathering public 

comments, but had no intention of 

modifying the proposal to address the 

concerns raised by the committee and 

the public. 

The purpose of modifying the DTW 

Class B airspace is to contain large 

turbine-powered aircraft conducting 

instrument procedures within Class B 

airspace once they entered it, enhance 

flight safety by segregating large turbinepowered aircraft and non-participating 

VFR aircraft flying in the vicinity of the 

DTW Class B airspace area, and contain 

the instrument procedures and 

associated traffic flows and patterns 

supporting those procedures at DTW 

within Class B airspace. The DTW Class 

B airspace design was influenced by Ad 

Hoc Committee and public comments 

and recommendations received 

throughout the airspace regulatory 

process addressing VFR aircraft training 

areas and activities west of DTW; 

protection of an uncharted VFR flyway 

over the Detroit River; the glider, 

parachute, and ultra-light activities 

located around DTW; the geographic 

location and proximity of satellite 

airports around DTW; and potential 

impacts to non-participant VFR aircraft 

transiting the DTW terminal area. 

In direct response to comments and 

recommendations received, the FAA 

made numerous adjustments to the 

Class B airspace area proposal. This 

included reducing the western 

boundary and associated Class B 

airspace shelves, adjusting multiple 

Class B airspace sub-area boundaries 

and floor altitudes, retaining an 

uncharted VFR flyway, and aligning 

airspace boundaries with easily 

identifiable geographic landmarks. 

The FAA removed the airspace area 

west of DTW from the Class B airspace 

proposal, from the DXO 333 radial 

counterclockwise to the SVM 217 radial 

west of Ann Arbor and Willow Run 

airports, and terminated the Class B 

airspace shelf located 25 nautical miles 

(NM) to 30 NM southwest of DTW and 

east of Meyers-Divers Airport (3TE). The 

reduced western boundary provides the 

minimum amount of Class B airspace 

necessary to contain large turbinepowered aircraft flying the instrument 

procedures and associated traffic 

patterns to/from DTW within Class B 

airspace while minimizing impact to 

VFR aircraft flying in existing training 

areas, parachute and glider activities, 

and airport operations all located west 

of DTW. 

After originally planning to lower 

Class B airspace north of DTW in the 

vicinity of the highways from 4,000 feet 

MSL to 3,000 feet MSL, the FAA raised 

the proposed shelf to a minimum of 

3,500 feet MSL along the entire length 

of Interstate 696 (I–696). That change 

specifically responded to concerns 

about a reduced volume of airspace 

being squeezed between the Class B 

airspace floor, the obstructions along I– 

696, and aircraft flying in and out of 

Oakland-Troy Airport (VLL) depicted in 

the original design. 

With respect to recommendations for 

a single Class B airspace floor overlying 

Class D airspace areas, the FAA 

minimized the proposed Class B 

airspace to the extent practical to ensure 

containment of large turbine-powered 

aircraft flying instrument procedures 

within Class B airspace. The FAA does 

not agree with establishing a single 

Class B airspace floor over the two 

airports affected by this 

recommendation (Ann Arbor Municipal 

Airport (ARB) and Coleman A. Young 

Municipal Airport (DET)) because this 

would be excessive to what is required 

and unnecessarily include navigable 

airspace that would otherwise be 

available to non-participating VFR 

aircraft. 

Based on recommendations not to 

lower the 3,000-foot MSL Class B 

airspace floor above an uncharted VFR 

flyway over the Detroit River, the FAA 

moved the proposed 2,500-foot MSL 

Class B airspace shelf boundary closer 

to DTW to a 10 NM arc of the DXO 

VOR/DME and reduced the proposed 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 13 / Tuesday, January 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 3307 

Class B airspace surface area boundary 

to an 8 NM arc of the DXO VOR/DME. 

These adjustments ensure that the 

existing uncharted VFR flyway will be 

unaffected, allow easier access at the 

southern end of the Detroit River, and 

enable practice approaches at Grosse Ile 

Municipal Airport (ONZ) without 

needing a Class B airspace clearance. 

The FAA also used landmarks to 

assist VFR pilots in non-GPS equipped 

aircraft with easily determining their 

position relative Class B airspace 

boundaries. As recommended by the Ad 

Hoc Committee and airspace users, this 

rule adopts boundary modifications that 

align with Interstate highways I–696 

and I–94, the Ford World Headquarters 

building, and the Detroit River and Lake 

Erie shoreline. Additionally, the FAA 

retained numerous landmarks depicted 

on the Detroit VFR Terminal Area Chart 

to assist VFR pilots. 

Fourteen comments addressed the 

proposed vertical expansion of the DTW 

Class B airspace ceiling from 8,000 feet 

MSL to 10,000 feet MSL. Four 

commenters challenged the operational 

necessity of the Class B airspace ceiling 

being raised. Eleven of the commenters 

argued that raising the Class B airspace 

area ceiling to 10,000 feet MSL does not 

increase safety. 

Raising the ceiling of the DTW Class 

B airspace area is necessary to enhance 

flight safety for all airspace users in the 

DTW terminal area. As mentioned in the 

NPRM, DTW arrivals enter the terminal 

area at 12,000 feet MSL, enter the traffic 

patterns abeam DTW descending out of 

11,000 feet MSL, and are then vectored 

by the final controller beginning at 

9,000 feet MSL on the downwind and 

8,000 feet MSL on base leg of the 

patterns to the final approaches. As a 

result, a 3,000 foot gap of airspace exists 

between the altitude that DTW arrivals 

are descending out of to enter the traffic 

pattern at 11,000 feet MSL and the Class 

B ceiling of 8,000 feet. Large turbinepowered aircraft arriving DTW and nonparticipating VFR aircraft, not 

communicating with Detroit Terminal 

Radar Approach Control (D21), are 

operating simultaneously within this 

gap of airspace today. 

The FAA identified several issues 

with the 8,000 foot MSL ceiling. It does 

not segregate large turbine-powered 

aircraft arriving/departing DTW from 

the conflicting non-participant VFR 

aircraft flying over the DTW Class B 

airspace at 8,500 and 9,500 feet MSL. 

Additionally, VHF Omnidirectional 

Range (VOR) Federal airways V–2, V– 

10, V–65, V–116, V–133, V–176, V–188, 

V–276, V–383, V–410, and V–426 

traverse the DTW terminal area and 

enable VFR aircraft, not communicating 

with D21, to fly over the DTW Class B 

airspace area and conflict with the DTW 

arrival/departure flows operating in the 

same airspace area. Raising the ceiling 

of the DTW Class B airspace will 

enhance flight safety by segregating the 

large turbine-powered aircraft arriving/

departing DTW and the nonparticipating VFR aircraft overflying 

DTW. 

Raising the DTW Class B airspace 

ceiling to 10,000 feet MSL also provides 

operational and safety advantages by 

establishing additional airspace for ATC 

to more efficiently vector and sequence 

arrival and departure aircraft within the 

Class B airspace, as well as segregate 

them from non-participating VFR 

aircraft that are operating in the same 

volume of airspace overhead DTW, as 

they do today. The raised ceiling 

ensures departure aircraft achieve the 

required 1,000 feet of standard 

separation over the top of the 

downwind arrival traffic flying at 9,000 

feet MSL, while remaining 1,000 feet 

below the traffic pattern aircraft at 

11,000 feet MSL. Currently, aircraft 

departing DTW and requesting to climb 

to 10,000 feet MSL and above are 

impacted when D21 must vector the 

aircraft, at low altitudes, to avoid 

conflicting non-participant VFR traffic 

overflying the DTW Class B airspace 

area. In some instances, D21 must stop 

all departures until the conflicting 

traffic is clear. Raising the Class B 

airspace ceiling to 10,000 feet MSL 

requires non-participant VFR over flight 

traffic, which opt to obtain Class B 

airspace services, to communicate with 

D21. This will enhance the operational 

and flight safety benefits for all aircraft 

operating above DTW, up to 10,000 feet 

MSL, by enabling D21 to efficiently 

sequence and separate arriving, 

departing, and non-participant VFR over 

flight aircraft simultaneously operating 

within DTW Class B airspace. 

Also, as noted in the NPRM, the 

eastern portion of the DTW Class B 

airspace area extends into Canadian 

airspace. The equivalent Canadian 

airspace to Class B airspace, as 

designated in the United States, is Class 

C airspace. NAV CANADA, the 

Canadian air service navigation 

provider, generally designates Class C 

airspace with a 12,500 feet MSL ceiling, 

however, has advised the FAA of its 

willingness to establish corresponding 

Canadian Class C airspace adjoining the 

FAA’s DTW Class B airspace with a 

ceiling of 10,000 feet MSL. 

Additionally, NAV CANADA advised it 

would make the Canadian Class C 

airspace action effective to match the 

effective date of this DTW Class B 

airspace modification action. 

Six commenters asserted that there 

was insufficient justification to expand 

the Class B airspace area boundary from 

20 NM to 30 NM and that the proposed 

expansion was based solely on future 

procedures. One of the commenters 

further argued that extending the lateral 

boundaries of DTW Class B airspace to 

30 NM will greatly affect the VFR flight 

areas for airports like Brighton and 

Livingston County for aircraft without 

electrical systems. 

Extending the DTW Class B airspace 

to a 30 NM boundary is designed to 

address current and future issues of 

containing aircraft executing instrument 

procedures within the confines of Class 

B airspace. Today, large turbinepowered aircraft conducting dual SIILS 

procedures are unable to be contained 

within existing Class B airspace and are 

entering, exiting, and reentering DTW 

Class B airspace while flying the 

published instrument approach 

procedures and associated traffic 

patterns. There are approximately 1,770 

operations daily at DTW and D21 is 

experiencing an average of 156 Class B 

airspace excursions by large turbinepowered aircraft per day. As a result, 

large turbine-powered aircraft and nonparticipating VFR aircraft flying in the 

vicinity of the Class B airspace 

boundaries, not in communication with 

D21, are operating simultaneously in the 

same volume of airspace. 

The existing dual SIILS approaches in 

use today enable an arrival capacity of 

72 arrivals an hour. The expanded 

boundary provides the minimum 

amount of airspace essential to contain 

the large turbine-powered aircraft 

arriving from multiple arrival streams 

being sequenced for and conducting the 

SIILS procedures. Aircraft flying dual 

SIILS procedures are assigned altitudes 

that differ by at least 1,000 feet and they 

are turned on to SIILS approaches so as 

to ensure they are established on the 

localizer signal at or outside mandatory 

turn on points. For dual SIILS approach 

configurations to Runways 21L/22R, the 

mandatory turn on point is 18 NM from 

the runways; for Runways 3R/4L, the 

mandatory turn on point is 18 NM from 

the runways; and for Runways 27L/27R, 

the mandatory turn on point is 20 NM 

from the runways. These are the 

minimum distances that large turbinepowered aircraft must be established on 

the localizer signal for dual SIILS 

approaches and facilitate D21 

controllers to meet minimum aircraft 

separation guidance requirements for 

simultaneous independent ILS 

approaches. During moderate to heavy 

arrival rushes, the turn on distances 

extend outward an additional four to ten 

NM beyond the minimum turn on 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
3308 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 13 / Tuesday, January 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

distances; extending beyond the 20 NM 

DTW Class B airspace boundary. 

Although the existing dual SIILS 

procedures enable an arrival capacity of 

72 aircraft per hour, DTW demand 

exceeds that level on a daily basis. To 

address this shortcoming of capacity, 

triple SIILS approach procedures, which 

increase DTW is arrival capacity to 112 

arrivals per hour, are planned for 

implementation in spring 2014. As with 

dual SIILS procedures, aircraft 

conducting triple SIILS procedures will 

be assigned altitudes differing by at least 

1,000 feet and turned on to the SIILS 

approaches so they are established on 

the localizer signal at or outside 

mandatory turn on points. For triple 

SIILS approaches to a Runways 21L/

22L/22R configuration, the mandatory 

turn on point is 21 NM from the 

runways, and for a Runways 3R/4R/4L 

configuration, the mandatory turn on 

point is 20 NM from the runways. These 

are the minimum distances aircraft must 

be established on the localizer signal for 

triple SIILS approaches, thereby 

allowing D21 controllers to meet 

minimum aircraft separation guidance 

requirements for simultaneous 

independent ILS approaches. And, 

during moderate to heavy arrival rushes, 

the turn on distances will again extend 

an additional 4 to 10 NM beyond these 

minimum turn on distances; extending 

beyond the 20 NM DTW Class B 

airspace boundary. 

With respect to the comment that 

extending the lateral boundaries to 30 

NM will greatly affect the VFR flight 

areas of airports like Brighton and 

Livingston County for aircraft without 

electrical systems, both airports fall 

outside the 30 NM DTW Class B 

airspace area boundary. As such, there 

is no affect or impact expected to the 

VFR flight areas of these airports for 

aircraft with or without electrical 

systems. Modifying the Class B airspace 

boundary to extend to 30 NM is 

necessary to enhance flight safety by 

containing the large turbine-powered 

aircraft flying instrument procedures at 

DTW within Class B airspace, as well as 

segregating those aircraft and nonparticipating VFR aircraft operating in 

the vicinity of the DTW Class B airspace 

area from one another. 

Five commenters addressed the new 

Class B airspace shelves included in the 

proposal and the floor altitudes of those 

areas. Specifically the commenters 

contend that the FAA ignored user 

feedback and requests to raise the newly 

proposed outermost ring of Class B 

airspace to a floor of 8,000 feet MSL and 

commenting that the lower 6,000 foot 

MSL floors were unjustified. They 

further argued that the Class B airspace 

shelves proposed southwest of DTW 

that lowered a portion of an existing 

Class B airspace from 4,000 feet MSL to 

3,000 feet MSL and established two new 

Class B airspace shelves with floors at 

4,000 feet MSL and 6,000 feet MSL were 

unnecessary. 

The DTW Class B airspace area 

boundary, extending to 30 NM north of 

DTW clockwise to the southwest of 

DTW, is necessary for the reasons stated 

above. Specific to the comments 

received about Class B airspace floor 

altitudes, the Class B airspace 

modifications accomplished by this 

action establishing new Class B airspace 

shelves with 3,000-foot MSL, 4,000-foot 

MSL, and 6,000-foot MSL floors, which 

are necessary to contain the large 

turbine-powered aircraft being vectored 

for and conducting instrument 

procedures at DTW within Class B 

airspace. Additionally, the amended 

and new Class B airspace floor altitudes 

are aligned with the glide slopes of all 

the ILS approaches to ensure aircraft 

flying the instrument procedures are 

contained within Class B airspace 

throughout the entire approach. 

Operationally, aircraft conducting 

dual SIILS approaches to any of the 

three existing dual SIILS runway 

configurations enter the DTW terminal 

area at 12,000 feet MSL descending to 

enter the traffic pattern at either 6,000 

feet MSL, descending further to as low 

as 4,000 feet MSL on a base leg, or at 

7,000 feet MSL abeam DTW on a 

downwind, descending further to as low 

as 4,000 feet MSL on a base leg. 

Regardless of traffic flow (north, south, 

or west), or the direction from which the 

aircraft enters the DTW terminal area, 

all aircraft are descended to as low as 

4,000 feet MSL in preparation for turn 

on to the final approach course prior to 

the mandatory turn on points 

mentioned previously. When the 

planned triple SIILS procedures are 

implemented to either of the triple SIILS 

runway configurations, aircraft assigned 

the ‘‘middle runway’’ will enter the 

terminal area at 12,000 feet MSL, be 

delivered to, and vectored by, the final 

controller at 9,000 feet MSL on the 

downwind and at 8,000 feet MSL on a 

base leg. The aircraft assigned the 

outboard runways will continue to enter 

the traffic pattern at 6,000 feet MSL and 

7,000 feet MSL abeam DTW on a 

downwind, descending to as low as 

4,000 feet MSL on base leg, as described 

above for dual SIILS procedures. 

The DTW Class B airspace area floor 

altitudes established by this rule, 

extending to 30 NM, ensure 

containment of large turbine-powered 

aircraft being vectored for and 

conducting SIILS approaches to the 

three existing dual SIILS configurations 

today (runways 4L/3R, runways 22R/

21L, and runways 27L/27R) within 

Class B airspace; assure segregation of 

large turbine-powered aircraft and nonparticipating VFR aircraft from 

operating simultaneously in the same 

airspace; and provide a Class B airspace 

configuration that ensures future 

containment needs when DTW 

implements triple SIILS procedures to 

meet arrival capacity requirements. 

Six commenters contended that there 

are safety concerns associated with the 

Class B airspace modifications. Five of 

the commenters submitted that the 

proposed changes would force nonparticipating VFR aircraft to fly at lower 

altitudes to circumnavigate Class B 

airspace and would compress this 

transient VFR traffic into the same 

airspace areas that general aviation 

airports are operating, thereby creating a 

dangerous situation due to increased 

congestion and risk of mid-air collision. 

One commenter objected to the 

proposed changes stating that the 

modifications would decrease the 

usability and safety of Detroit’s airspace. 

The primary purpose of a Class B 

airspace area is to reduce the potential 

for midair collisions in the airspace 

surrounding airports with high density 

air traffic operations by providing an 

area in which all aircraft are subject to 

certain operating rules and equipment 

requirements. FAA directives require 

Class B airspace areas be designed to 

contain all instrument procedures, and 

that air traffic controllers vector aircraft 

as appropriate to remain within Class B 

airspace after entry. 

With the DTW Class B airspace 

configuration established in 1987, 

arriving large turbine-powered aircraft 

routinely enter, exit, and then re-enter 

Class B airspace while flying published 

instrument procedures today, which is 

contrary to FAA directives. The 

procedural requirements for establishing 

these aircraft on the final approach 

courses, to conduct simultaneous 

independent approaches to the existing 

parallel runways, has resulted in aircraft 

exceeding the lateral boundaries of the 

Class B airspace by up to 10 NM during 

moderate to heavy arrival rushes. The 

DTW Class B airspace modified by this 

rule enhances flight safety by containing 

all instrument approach procedures and 

associated traffic patterns within the 

boundaries of Class B airspace, 

supporting increased operations to the 

current dual and planned triple SIILS 

runways, and better segregating the 

large turbine-powered aircraft arriving/

departing DTW and non-participating 

VFR aircraft operating in the vicinity of 

DTW Class B airspace from one another. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 13 / Tuesday, January 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 3309 

The FAA acknowledges and 

recognizes that VFR pilots electing to fly 

below the floor of Class B airspace may 

be compressed. However, the lower 

floors are necessary to segregate those 

aircraft operations from the large 

turbine-powered aircraft arriving and 

departing DTW. The Detroit terminal 

area encompasses the world’s eleventh 

(out of fifty) busiest airport (with over 

443,000 airport operations in CY 2011), 

plus numerous other airports situated in 

and around the Detroit terminal area. 

These factors create a complex, high 

density airspace environment 

containing a highly diverse mix of 

aircraft types and aviation activities. In 

some areas, large turbine-powered 

aircraft and non-participating VFR 

aircraft are flying simultaneously in the 

same airspace. It is essential to segregate 

the large turbine-powered aircraft 

arriving/departing DTW and the nonparticipating VFR aircraft that may not 

be in communication with ATC. 

Consequently, some non-participating 

VFR aircraft may have to fly further, or 

at different altitudes, in order to remain 

clear of the modified DTW Class B 

airspace area. Ultimately, it is the pilot’s 

responsibility to evaluate all factors that 

could affect a planned flight and 

determine the safest course of action 

whether it is circumnavigating the Class 

B airspace, flying over or beneath the 

Class B airspace, utilizing a charted VFR 

flyway, or requesting Class B clearance 

and services from D21. 

Six commenters asserted that the 

Class B airspace modifications will 

place an undue burden on general 

aviation operators wishing to conduct 

VFR training flights. The commenters 

claimed that the modifications will have 

a negative impact on training and 

further believed that there will not be 

sufficient altitudes available to conduct 

most maneuvers. 

The DTW Class B airspace will not 

cause any VFR training practice areas to 

be lost due to the modified design. The 

FAA acknowledges that the floor of the 

Class B airspace established by this 

action could impact the available 

altitudes in portions of some training 

areas located southwest of DTW and a 

portion of one training area northwest of 

DTW, should VFR training aircraft 

choose not to request Class B services 

with D21. However, by adopting a 

number of recommendation submitted 

by the Ad Hoc Committee and during 

informal airspace meetings, the FAA 

adjusted the western boundary of Class 

B airspace to alleviate many practice 

area impacts. The result is that the 

practice areas west and north of Ann 

Arbor would be unaffected. 

The Class B airspace established 

southwest of DTW is required to contain 

large turbine-powered aircraft 

conducting dual SIILS arrival 

procedures to Runways 4L/3R, as well 

as arrivals entering the DTW terminal 

airspace via the POLAR1 STAR. It 

extends over approximately three 

quarters of the Eastern Michigan 

University (EMU) Aviation flight 

school’s southern practice area with 

3,500-foot MSL, 4,000-foot MSL, and 

6,000-foot MSL Class B airspace floors. 

The EMU southern practice area is 

subdivided into four sub-areas with 

virtually no impact to the west 

northwest sub-area and minor impacts 

to the southern sub-area, but training 

activities in the northeast and southeast 

sub-areas will be limited to 4,000 feet 

MSL, unless pilots receive a Class B 

airspace clearance. The FAA does not 

expect a substantive change to the 

concentration of VFR training aircraft or 

training activities conducted in that 

practice area or the other practice areas 

located further southwest of DTW under 

the 6,000-foot MSL Class B airspace 

shelf. The training activities conducted 

in those practice areas today could 

continue under the DTW Class B 

airspace or within Class B airspace with 

the appropriate Class B airspace 

clearance. 

The VFR practice area near the 

General Motors Proving Ground, located 

north of DTW and southwest of PTK, is 

partially under a DTW Class B airspace 

shelf with a 6,000-foot MSL floor; 

however, VFR training flight activities 

above 6,000 feet MSL are not normally 

accomplished there and the 6,000-foot 

MSL Class B airspace floor will have 

negligible impact. 

And, as noted in the NPRM, the FAA 

will continue working with the local 

flight training schools to discuss and 

pursue aircraft training program 

activities, scheduling, and airspace 

alternatives, as required, independent of 

this Class B airspace modification 

action. 

Three commenters challenged the 

DTW Class B airspace modifications 

arguing that they increase the waste of 

fuel, time, and cost to the VFR traffic 

that currently uses the airspace areas 

being established as Class B airspace. 

One commenter contends that there 

would be increases to the cost of flight 

training to clear the Class B airspace 

area completely, while another 

commenter allege that the Class B 

airspace hampers the effectiveness of 

the General Aviation (GA) community 

in the Detroit Metropolitan area and 

costs them more to operate in and 

around DTW. 

The FAA recognizes the Class B 

airspace modifications could increase 

fuel burn for non-participating VFR 

aircraft. To remain clear of the DTW 

Class B airspace area, non-participating 

VFR pilots who elect not to contact D21 

for Class B services may end up flying 

at lower altitude or further distances to 

circumnavigate the Class B airspace. 

However, this action is necessary to 

separate them from the large turbinepowered aircraft being contained within 

the Class B airspace while flying 

instrument procedures and associated 

traffic flows/patterns. While some GA 

pilots will opt to fly additional distance 

or different altitudes to circumnavigate 

the Class B airspace, the FAA believes 

any increase in fuel burn or cost to be 

minimal and justified by the overall 

increase in flight safety. The DTW Class 

B airspace has no impact to the routes 

or altitudes assigned to IFR and 

participating VFR aircraft flying in the 

Detroit terminal area. Additionally, the 

VFR flyways that are charted on the 

Detroit VFR Terminal Area Chart remain 

available for use by GA pilots to transit 

north and south or east and west under 

and around the DTW Class B airspace 

area. 

As addressed previously, the Class B 

airspace design incorporated 

recommended changes received from 

the Ad Hoc Committee and informal 

airspace meetings to prevent impacts, 

operationally and economically, to the 

non-participating VFR training aircraft 

flying in the vicinity of the DTW Class 

B airspace area. 

Fifteen comments were received from 

the public regarding the fair and 

equitable access to the DTW Class B 

airspace area. Eleven of the commenters 

asserted that the Class B airspace design 

unfairly affects the activities of the local 

GA community, limiting their access, 

without a demonstrated need. Three 

commenters stated that D21 routinely 

denies Class B airspace entry requests, 

or ignores the requests altogether, to 

highlight the limited access. 

The FAA remains committed to 

providing Class B airspace services to 

all National Airspace System (NAS) 

users operating in the airspace 

surrounding DTW in a manner that 

keeps the Detroit terminal area safe for 

all users. As mentioned previously, the 

primary purpose of a Class B airspace 

area is to reduce the potential for midair 

collisions in the airspace surrounding 

airports with high density air traffic 

operations by providing an area in 

which all aircraft are subject to certain 

operating rules and equipment 

requirements. 

Class B airspace services are not 

restricted to only those aircraft landing 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
3310 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 13 / Tuesday, January 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

or departing the primary airports around 

which the Class B airspace is 

established. Various types of aircraft are 

routinely cleared into and through DTW 

Class B airspace when traffic conditions 

permit doing so safely. Based on 

historical data and forecast trends, the 

D21 average daily traffic count includes 

684 air carrier, 707 air taxi, 364 general 

aviation, 15 military IFR operations and 

69 VFR operations. When VFR aircraft 

request Class B services to transit the 

DTW Class B airspace, they are initially 

told to remain outside the Class B 

airspace until radar identification is 

established; unfortunately and 

oftentimes, this is misunderstood as 

denial of Class B services. In 2012, D21 

provided Class B services to 25,216 VFR 

aircraft operations. Routinely, D21 

provides Class B airspace clearances 

and services to VFR aircraft requesting 

access into and through the DTW Class 

B airspace when the arrival/departure 

traffic volume and airspace capacity 

conditions enable doing so safely. 

Differences From the NPRM 

Editorial corrections have been made 

to the Detroit Class B airspace 

description for clarity and for 

standardization. Areas A, C, D, F, and H 

have editorial corrections whereas, the 

Detroit Class B airspace header and all 

Areas with reference to ‘‘DXO VOR– 

DME’’ have been corrected to read 

‘‘DXO VOR/DME’’ for standardization. 

Also, in the NPRM description of Area 

A, a typographical error that listed a 

geographic reference as ‘‘lat. 42°5′17′′ 

N., long. 83°26′04′′ W.’’ on the 4.4-mile 

radius of the Detroit Willow Run 

Airport has been corrected to read ‘‘lat. 

42°15′17′′ N., long. 83°26′04′′ W.’’. With 

the exception of the above noted 

changes and minor editorial corrections, 

this rule reflects the same Class B 

airspace area as that published in the 

NPRM. 

The Rule 

The FAA is amending Title 14 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) 

part 71 to modify the Detroit Class B 

airspace area. This action (depicted on 

the chart in Figure 1—Amendment of 

the Detroit, MI Class B Airspace Area) 

lowers the floor of Class B airspace in 

portions of the Detroit Class B airspace 

area; extends Class B airspace out to 30 

NM to the north, east (designated Class 

C airspace in Canada), and south of 

DTW; and raises the ceiling of the entire 

Class B airspace area from 8,000 feet 

MSL to 10,000 feet MSL. These 

modifications provide the airspace 

needed to contain large turbine-powered 

aircraft conducting instrument 

procedures within the confines of Class 

B airspace, especially when flying 

existing dual and planned triple SIILS 

approaches. Additionally, these airspace 

modifications will ensure efficient 

airspace utilization and enhance safety 

by better segregating the large turbinepowered IFR aircraft arriving/departing 

DTW and the non-participating VFR 

aircraft operating in the vicinity of the 

Detroit Class B airspace area. The 

modifications to the Detroit Class B 

airspace area are summarized below: 

Area A. Area A extends from the 

ground upward to 10,000 feet MSL, 

centered on the Detroit VOR/DME 

antenna. The surface area is expanded 

by relocating the southern boundary 

approximately 2.5 NM further south and 

lowering the Class B airspace floor in 

that expanded portion of existing Class 

B airspace from 2,500 feet MSL to the 

surface. 

Area B. Area B extends upward from 

2,500 feet MSL to 10,000 feet MSL. The 

Area B extends from north clockwise to 

the southwest of DTW between the 8 

NM and the 10 NM arcs of the Detroit 

VOR/DME antenna. The Class B 

airspace floor is lowered from 3,000 feet 

MSL to 2,500 feet MSL in the expanded 

portions of existing Class B airspace 

northeast and southeast of DTW. 

Area C. Area C continues to surround 

Areas A and B and extends upward 

from 3,000 feet MSL to 10,000 feet MSL. 

The Area C boundary from east 

clockwise to the southwest of DTW is 

expanded to match the 20 NM arc of the 

Detroit VOR/DME antenna and from 

north clockwise to the northeast of DTW 

is expanded to match the 15 NM arc of 

the Detroit VOR/DME antenna. The 

Class B airspace floor is lowered from 

4,000 feet MSL to 3,000 feet MSL in the 

expanded portions of existing Class B 

airspace and established at 4,000 feet 

MSL for the expanded portions that 

were previously outside the Detroit 

Class B airspace area. 

Area D. Area D is redefined to extend 

upward from 3,500 feet MSL to 10,000 

feet MSL. Area D overlays the 

southeastern half of the Ann Arbor Class 

D airspace area and extends 

approximately 7 NM south of the Ann 

Arbor Class D airspace area between the 

15 NM and 20 NM arcs of the Detroit 

VOR/DME antenna. The Class B 

airspace floor is raised from 3,000 feet 

MSL to 3,500 feet MSL for a portion of 

existing Class B airspace area, lowered 

from 4,000 feet MSL to 3,500 feet MSL 

for another portion of existing Class B 

airspace area, and established at 3,500 

feet MSL for the portion that was 

previously outside the Detroit Class B 

airspace area. 

Area E. Area E is a new subarea that 

extends upward from 3,500 feet MSL to 

10,000 feet MSL. Area E is located north 

clockwise to northeast of DTW between 

the 15 NM and 20 NM arcs of the Detroit 

VOR/DME antenna. The Class B 

airspace floor is lowered from 4,000 feet 

MSL to 3,500 feet MSL in the portion of 

existing Class B airspace and 

established at 3,500 feet MSL for the 

portions that were previously outside 

the Detroit Class B airspace area. 

Area F. Area F is a new subarea that 

extends upward from 4,000 feet MSL to 

10,000 feet MSL. This area is 

established from north clockwise to 

west southwest of DTW between the 20 

NM and 25 NM arcs of the Detroit VOR/ 

DME antenna. The Class B airspace floor 

is raised from 3,000 feet MSL to 4,000 

feet MSL in the portion of existing Class 

B airspace located west of DTW and 

established at 4,000 feet MSL for the 

portion that was previously outside the 

Detroit Class B airspace area. 

Area G. Area G is a new subarea that 

extends upward from 6,000 feet MSL to 

10,000 feet MSL. This new area is 

located southwest of DTW between the 

25 NM and 30 NM arcs of the Detroit 

VOR/DME antenna. This area abuts 

Area F and I (described below) and 

establishes the Class B airspace floor at 

6,000 feet MSL in airspace previously 

outside of the Detroit Class B airspace 

area. 

Area H. Area H is also a new subarea 

that extends upward from 6,000 feet 

MSL to 10,000 feet MSL. This new area 

is located from north northwest 

clockwise to southeast of DTW and 

abuts Areas C, E, F, and I (described 

below) extending to the 25 NM arc of 

the Detroit VOR/DME antenna. The 

Class B airspace floor is established at 

6,000 feet MSL in airspace previously 

outside of the Detroit Class B airspace 

area. 

Area I. Area I is another new subarea 

that extends upward from 9,000 feet 

MSL to 10,000 feet MSL. This new area 

is established south of DTW and abuts 

Areas F, G, and H extending to the 30 

NM arc of the Detroit VOR/DME 

antenna. The Class B airspace floor is 

established at 9,000 feet MSL in 

airspace previously outside the Detroit 

Class B airspace area. 

Finally, this action updates the DTW 

airport reference point coordinates to 

reflect current NAS data; includes all 

airports and navigation aids, with 

geographic coordinates, used to describe 

the Detroit Class B airspace in the 

Detroit Class B airspace area legal 

description header; and describes the 

Detroit Class B airspace area centered on 

the Detroit VOR/DME (DXO) antenna. 

All radials listed in the Detroit Class 

B airspace area description in this rule 

are stated in degrees relative to True 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 13 / Tuesday, January 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 3311 

North. All geographic coordinates listed 

in the Detroit Class B airspace area 

description in this rule are stated in 

degrees, minutes, and seconds based on 

North American Datum 83. And, all 

mileages listed in the Detroit Class B 

airspace area description in this rule are 

nautical miles. 

Class B airspace areas are published 

in paragraph 3000 of FAA Order 

7400.9X, Airspace Designations and 

Reporting Points, dated August 7, 2013, 

and effective September 15, 2013, which 

is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 

section 71.1. The Class B airspace area 

listed in this rule will be published 

subsequently in the Order. 

Environmental Review 

The FAA has determined that this 

action qualifies for categorical exclusion 

under the National Environmental 

Policy Act in accordance with FAA 

Order 1050.1E, ‘‘Environmental 

Impacts: Policies and Procedures,’’ 

paragraph 311a. This airspace action is 

not expected to cause any potentially 

significant environmental impacts, and 

no extraordinary circumstances exist 

that warrant preparation of an 

environmental assessment. 

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. We 

have determined that there is no new 

information collection requirement 

associated with this rule. 

Regulatory Evaluation Summary 

Changes to Federal regulations must 

undergo several economic analyses. 

First, Executive Order 12866 and 

Executive Order 13563 direct 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, the 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. 

Department of Transportation Order 

DOT 2100.5 prescribes policies and 

procedures for simplification, analysis, 

and review of regulations. If the 

expected cost impact is so minimal that 

a proposed or final rule does not 

warrant a full evaluation, this order 

permits that a statement to that effect 

and the basis for it be included in the 

preamble if a full regulatory evaluation 

of the cost and benefits is not prepared. 

Such a determination has been made for 

this final rule. The reasoning for this 

determination follows: 

In conducting these analyses, the FAA 

has determined that this final rule: 

(1) Imposes minimal incremental 

costs and provides benefits, 

(2) Is not an economically ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ as defined in section 

3(f) of Executive Order 12866, 

(3) Is not significant as defined in 

DOT’s Regulatory Policies and 

Procedures; 

(4) Will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities; 

(5) Will not have a significant effect 

on international trade; and 

(6) Will not impose an unfunded 

mandate on state, local, or tribal 

governments, or on the private sector by 

exceeding the monetary threshold 

identified. 

These analyses are summarized below. 

This final rule modifies the Detroit, 

MI, Class B airspace to contain aircraft 

conducting published instrument 

procedures at Detroit Metropolitan 

Wayne County (DTW), Detroit, MI, 

within Class B airspace. The FAA is 

taking this action to support all three 

existing Simultaneous Instrument 

Landing System (SILS) configurations 

today; runways 22/21, runways 4/3 and 

runways 27L/27R, as well as to support 

containment for triple SILS operations 

planned for the very near future for 

runways 4L/4R/3R and runways 21L/

22L/22R. 

The benefits of this rule are enhanced 

safety, improved flow of air traffic, and 

reduced potential for midair collisions 

in the DTW terminal area. In addition, 

this rule supports the FAA’s national 

airspace redesign goal of optimizing 

terminal and enroute airspace areas to 

reduce aircraft delays and improve 

system capacity. 

As described in the NPRM, the costs 

of this final rule will include the costs 

of general aviation aircraft that might 

have to fly further. However, the FAA 

believes that any such costs will be 

minimal because the FAA designed the 

airspace to minimize the effect on 

aviation users who would not fly in the 

Class B airspace. In addition the FAA 

held a series of meetings to solicit 

comments from people who thought 

that they might be affected by the 

proposal. Wherever possible the FAA 

included the comments from those 

meetings in this final rule. 

The FAA received no comments on 

the FAA’s request for comments on the 

minimal cost determination. Therefore, 

the FAA has determined that this final 

rule is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ as defined in section 3(f) of 

Executive Order 12866, and is not 

‘‘significant’’ as defined in DOT’s 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures. 

Regulatory Flexibility Determination 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

(Pub. L. 96–354) (RFA) 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 RFA requires agencies to solicit and 

consider flexible regulatory proposals 

and to explain the rationale for their 

actions to assure that such proposals are 

given serious consideration. The RFA 

covers a wide-range of small entities, 

including small businesses, not-forprofit 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 agency determines that it 

will, the agency must prepare a 

regulatory flexibility analysis 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 RFA 

provides that the head of the agency 

may so certify and a regulatory 

flexibility analysis is not required. The 

certification must include a statement 

providing the factual basis for this 

determination, and the reasoning should 

be clear. 

In the Initial Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis the FAA determined that the 

proposed rule was expected to improve 

safety by redefining Class B airspace 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
3312 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 13 / Tuesday, January 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

boundaries and was expected to impose 

only minimal costs on small entities. 

The FAA requested comments on this 

determination. 

The FAA received no comments on 

small entity considerations. 

Therefore, the FAA Administrator 

certifies that this final 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 assessed the potential effect 

of this proposed rule in the NPRM and 

determined that it would encourage 

international cooperation between the 

United States and Canada and increase 

safety in both the United States and 

Canada because the proposal affects 

airspace in both these countries. The 

FAA received no comments on this 

determination. 

Therefore, the FAA has determined 

that this final rule will encourage 

international cooperation and increase 

safety between the United States and 

Canada. 

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 

(adjusted annually for inflation) 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 $143.1 

million in lieu of $100 million. This 

final rule does not contain such a 

mandate; therefore the requirements of 

Title II do not apply. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, 

Navigation (air). 

Adoption of the Amendment 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows: 

PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, 

B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR 

TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND 

REPORTING POINTS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 71 

continues to read as follows: 

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

40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959– 

1963 Comp., p. 389. 

§ 71.1 [Amended] 

■ 2. The incorporation by reference in 

14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal Aviation 

Administration Order 7400.9X, Airspace 

Designations and Reporting Points, 

dated August 7, 2013, and effective 

September 15, 2013, is amended as 

follows: 

Paragraph 3000 Subpart B—Class B 

Airspace 

* * * * * 

AGL MI B Detroit, MI 

Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport, 

MI (Primary Airport) 

(Lat. 42°12′45′′ N., long. 83°21′12′′ W.) 

Detroit, Willow Run Airport, MI 

(Lat. 42°14′21′′ N., long. 83°31′51′′ W.) 

Ann Arbor Municipal Airport, MI 

(Lat. 42°13′23′′ N., long. 83°44′44′′ W.) 

Coleman A. Young Municipal Airport, MI 

(Lat. 42°24′33′′ N., long. 83°00′36′′ W.) 

Detroit (DXO) VOR/DME 

(Lat. 42°12′47′′ N., long. 83°22′00′′ W.) 

Salem (SVM) VORTAC 

(Lat. 42°24′32′′ N., long. 83°35′39′′ W.) 

Area A. That airspace extending upward 

from the surface to and including 10,000 feet 

MSL within an area bounded by a line 

beginning at lat. 42°17′18′′ N., long. 83°27′27′′ 

W. on the 4.4-mile radius of the Detroit 

Willow Run Airport; thence northeast to lat. 

42°20′47′′ N., long. 83°22′12′′ W. on the 8- 

mile arc of the DXO VOR/DME; thence 

clockwise along the 8-mile arc of the DXO 

VOR/DME to intercept the 4.4-mile radius of 

the Detroit Willow Run Airport at lat. 

42°09′57′′ N., long. 83°32′04′′ W.; thence 

counterclockwise along the 4.4-mile radius of 

the Detroit Willow Run Airport to lat. 

42°12′08′′ N., long. 83°26′44′′ W.; thence 

north to lat. 42°15′17′′ N., long. 83°26′04′′ W. 

on the 4.4-mile radius of the Detroit Willow 

Run Airport; thence counterclockwise along 

the 4.4-mile radius of the Detroit Willow Run 

Airport to the point of beginning. 

Area B. That airspace extending upward 

from 2,500 feet MSL to and including 10,000 

feet MSL within an area bounded by a line 

beginning at the intersection of the DXO 

VOR/DME 354° radial and the Detroit Willow 

Run Airport 047° bearing; thence north along 

the DXO VOR/DME 354° radial to intercept 

the 10-mile arc of the DXO VOR/DME; thence 

clockwise along the 10-mile arc of the DXO 

VOR/DME to intercept the DXO VOR/DME 

234° radial; thence northeast along the DXO 

VOR/DME 234° radial to intercept the 8-mile 

arc of the DXO VOR/DME; thence 

counterclockwise along the 8-mile arc of the 

DXO VOR/DME arc to lat. 42°20′47′′ N., long. 

83°22′12′′ W.; thence southwest to the point 

of beginning. 

Area C. That airspace extending upward 

from 3,000 feet MSL to and including 10,000 

feet MSL within an area bounded by a line 

beginning at the intersection of the 5-mile arc 

of the SVM VORTAC and the 15-mile arc of 

the DXO VOR/DME at lat. 42°26′42′′ N., long. 

83°29′34′′ W.; thence clockwise along the 15- 

mile arc of the DXO VOR/DME to intercept 

the DXO VOR/DME 063° radial; thence 

northeast along the DXO VOR/DME 063° 

radial to intercept the 4.1-mile radius of the 

Coleman A. Young Municipal Airport at lat. 

42°20′30′′ N., long. 83°01′31′′ W.; thence 

counterclockwise along the 4.1-mile radius of 

the Coleman A. Young Municipal Airport to 

intercept the 20-mile arc of the DXO VOR/ 

DME at lat. 42°21′09′′ N., long. 82°57′31′′ W.; 

thence clockwise along the DXO 20-mile arc 

to intercept the DXO VOR/DME 234° radial; 

thence northeast along the DXO 234° radial 

to intercept the 15-mile arc of the DXO VOR/ 

DME; thence clockwise along the 15-mile arc 

of the DXO VOR/DME to intercept the 4.4- 

mile radius of the Ann Arbor Municipal 

Airport at lat. 42°09′36′′ N., long. 83°41′43′′ 

W.; thence counterclockwise along the 4.4- 

mile radius of the Ann Arbor Municipal 

Airport to intercept the SVM VORTAC 214° 

radial at lat. 42°17′21′′ N., long. 83°42′10′′ W.; 

thence northeast along the SVM VORTAC 

214° radial to intercept the 5-mile arc of the 

SVM VORTAC at lat. 42°20′23′′ N., long. 

83°39′25′′ W.; thence counterclockwise along 

the 5-mile arc of the SVM VORTAC to the 

point of beginning, excluding Areas A and B. 

Area D. That airspace extending upward 

from 3,500 feet MSL to and including 10,000 

feet MSL within an area bounded by a line 

beginning at the intersection of the SVM 

VORTAC 214° radial and the 20-mile arc of 

the DXO VOR/DME; thence counterclockwise 

along the 20-mile arc of the DXO VOR/DME 

to intercept the DXO VOR/DME 234° radial; 

thence northeast along the DXO VOR/DME 

234° radial to intercept the 15-mile arc of the 

DXO VOR/DME at lat. 42°03′57′′ N., long. 

83°38′18′′ W.; thence clockwise along the 15- 

mile arc of the DXO VOR/DME to intercept 

the 4.4-mile radius of the Ann Arbor 

Municipal Airport at lat. 42°09′36′′ N., long. 

83°41′43′′ W.; thence counterclockwise along 

the 4.4-mile radius of the Ann Arbor 

Municipal Airport to intercept the SVM 

VORTAC 214° radial at lat. 42°17′21′′ N., 

long. 83°42′10′′ W.; thence southwest along 

the SVM VORTAC 214° radial to the point of 

beginning. 

Area E. That airspace extending upward 

from 3,500 feet MSL to and including 10,000 

feet MSL within an area bounded by a line 

beginning at the intersection of the 5-mile arc 

of the SVM VORTAC and the 15-mile arc of 

the DXO VOR/DME at lat. 42°26′42′′ N., long. 

83°29′34′′ W.; thence clockwise along the 15- 

mile arc of the DXO VOR/DME to intercept 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 13 / Tuesday, January 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 3313 

the DXO VOR/DME 063° radial; thence 

northeast along the DXO VOR/DME 063° 

radial to intercept the 4.1-mile radius of the 

Coleman A. Young Municipal Airport at lat. 

42°20′30′′ N., long. 83°01′31′′ W.; thence 

counterclockwise along the 4.1-mile radius of 

the Coleman A. Young Municipal Airport to 

intercept the 20-mile arc of the DXO VOR/ 

DME at lat. 42°21′09′′ N., long. 82°57′31′′ W.; 

thence counterclockwise along the 20-mile 

arc of the DXO VOR/DME to intercept the 

SVM VORTAC 044° radial; thence southwest 

along the SVM VORTAC 044° radial to 

intercept the 5-mile arc of the SVM VORTAC 

at lat. 42°28′08′′ N., long. 83°30′58′′ W.; 

thence clockwise along the 5-mile arc of the 

SVM VORTAC to the point of beginning. 

Area F. That airspace extending upward 

from 4,000 feet MSL to and including 10,000 

feet MSL within an area bounded by a line 

beginning at the intersection of the SVM 

VORTAC 044° radial and the 25-mile arc of 

the DXO VOR/DME; thence clockwise along 

the 25-mile arc of the DXO VOR/DME to lat. 

41°48′32′′ N., long. 83°13′49′′ W.; thence west 

to intercept the 25-mile arc of the DXO VOR/ 

DME at lat. 41°48′11′′ N., long. 83°28′00′′ W.; 

thence clockwise along the 25-mile arc of the 

DXO VOR/DME to intercept the SVM 

VORTAC 214° radial; thence northeast along 

the SVM VORTAC 214° radial to intercept 

the 20-mile arc of the DXO VOR/DME at lat. 

42°10′10′′ N., long. 83°48′40′′ W.; thence 

counterclockwise along the 20-mile arc of the 

DXO VOR/DME to intercept the SVM 

VORTAC 044° radial; thence northeast along 

the SVM VORTAC 044° radial to the point of 

beginning. 

Area G. That airspace extending upward 

from 6,000 feet MSL to and including 10,000 

feet MSL within an area bounded by a line 

beginning at the intersection of the SVM 

VORTAC 214° radial and the 25-mile arc of 

the DXO VOR/DME at lat. 42°04′33′′ N., long. 

83°53′44′′ W.; thence counterclockwise along 

the 25-mile arc of the DXO VOR/DME to lat. 

41°48′11′′ N., long. 83°28′00′′ W.; thence west 

to intercept the 30-mile arc of the DXO VOR/ 

DME at lat. 41°47′43′′ N., long. 83°44′08′′ W.; 

thence clockwise along the 30-mile arc of the 

DXO VOR/DME to lat. 41°51′00′′ N., long. 

83°49′42′′ W.; thence north to the point of 

beginning. 

Area H. That airspace extending upward 

from 6,000 feet MSL to and including 10,000 

feet MSL within an area bounded by a line 

beginning at a point on the DXO VOR/DME 

327° radial at 30-miles at lat. 42°37′56′′ N., 

long. 83°44′08′′ W.; thence clockwise along 

the 30-mile arc of the DXO VOR/DME to lat. 

41°46′30′′ N., long. 83°02′36′′ W.; thence 

northwest to lat. 41°48′44′′ N., long. 83°05′28′′ 

W.; thence west to intercept the 25-mile arc 

of the DXO VOR/DME at lat. 41°48′32′′ N., 

long. 83°13′49′′ W.; thence counterclockwise 

along the 25-mile arc of the DXO VOR/DME 

until intercepting the SVM VORTAC 044° 

radial; thence southwest along the SVM 

VORTAC 044° radial until intercepting the 5- 

mile arc of the SVM VORTAC; thence 

clockwise along the 5-mile arc of the SVM 

VORTAC to intercept the DXO VOR/DME 

327° radial at lat. 42°21′52′′ N., long. 

83°29′57′′ W.; thence northwest along the 

DXO VOR/DME 327° radial to the point of 

beginning. 

Area I. That airspace extending upward 

from 9,000 feet MSL to and including 10,000 

feet MSL within an area bounded by a line 

beginning at lat. 41°47′43′′ N., long. 83°44′08′′ 

W. on the 30-mile arc of the DXO VOR/DME; 

thence counterclockwise along the 30-mile 

arc of the DXO VOR/DME to lat. 41°46′30′′ 

N., long. 83°02′36′′ W.; thence northwest to 

lat. 41°48′44′′ N., long. 83°05′28′′ W.; thence 

west to the point of beginning. 

Note: The Canadian airspace depicted in 

Areas C, F, and H above are included in the 

legal description for the Detroit Class B to 

accommodate charting. This accommodation 

reflects airspace established by Transport 

Canada to complete the Detroit Class B 

airspace area. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on January 9, 

2014. 

Gary A. Norek, 

Manager, Airspace Policy and Regulations 

Group. 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
3314 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 13 / Tuesday, January 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULESER21JA14.000</GPH>

3TE 

o 

Figure 1 

Modification of the Detroit, MI Class B Airspace Area 

(Docket No.09-AWA-4) 

OMTC 

For Information Only - Not For Navigation 
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 13 / Tuesday, January 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 3315 

[FR Doc. 2014–00622 Filed 1–17–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–C 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 71 

[Docket No. FAA–2012–1168; Airspace 

Docket No. 07–AWA–3] 

RIN 2120–AA66 

Modification of the Dallas/Fort Worth 

Class B Airspace Area; TX 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This action modifies the 

Dallas/Fort Worth, TX, Class B airspace 

area to ensure containment of large 

turbine-powered aircraft flying 

instrument procedures to and from the 

Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport 

(DFW) and Dallas Love Field Airport 

(DAL) within Class B airspace. The FAA 

is taking this action to further support 

its national airspace redesign goal of 

optimizing terminal and en route 

airspace areas to enhance safety, 

improve the flow of air traffic, and 

reduce the potential for near midair 

collision in the DFW terminal area. 

DATES: Effective Date: 0901 UTC, March 

6, 2014. The Director of the Federal 

Register approves this incorporation by 

reference action under 3 CFR part 51, 

subject to the annual revision of FAA 

Order 7400.9 and publication of 

conforming amendments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Colby Abbott, Airspace Policy and 

Regulations Group, AJV–11, Office of 

Airspace Services, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone: (202) 267–8783. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

History 

On January 22, 2013, the FAA 

published in the Federal Register a 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

to modify the Dallas/Fort Worth, TX, 

Class B airspace area (78 FR 4356). This 

action proposed to expand the lateral 

and vertical dimensions of the Dallas/

Fort Worth Class B airspace area to 

provide additional airspace needed to 

contain large turbine-powered aircraft 

flying instrument procedures to and 

from the Dallas/Fort Worth International 

Airport (DFW) and Dallas Love Field 

Airport (DAL) within Class B airspace. 

The NPRM noted that large turbinepowered aircraft routinely entered, 

exited, and then re-entered Class B 

airspace while flying published 

instrument approach procedures to 

DFW runway13R and DAL runways 

13L/13R and 31R/31L, which is contrary 

to FAA policy. 

Interested parties were invited to 

participate in this rulemaking effort by 

submitting written comments on the 

proposal. A total of 73 responses to the 

NPRM were received; of which, 13 

responses opposed the proposed action 

and did not provide any rationale or 

information for consideration. On April 

25, 2013, and subsequent to the close of 

the public comment period, the FAA 

received an inquiry from two 

Congressional members requesting that 

the FAA withdraw the NPRM and 

consider the alternative solution 

submitted by a commenter to the NPRM. 

This inquiry was added to the docket 

(making 74 responses total) and 

considered along with the responses 

received during the comment period. 

The FAA considered all substantive 

comments received before making a 

determination on the final rule. 

Discussion of Comments 

Of the 74 responses received to the 

NPRM, 61 concerned the airspace in the 

vicinity of Addison Airport (ADS). All 

of these commenters opposed the 

proposed modification to Area F, 

contending that it would result in lower 

flight paths for DAL arrivals and ADS 

arrivals and departures, and lead to 

various adverse impacts such as 

compression of VFR aircraft, safety of 

flight issues, increased noise, air 

pollution and health issues, lower 

property values, detrimental effect on 

local businesses, and decreased 

commerce at ADS. 

The above perceived impacts appear 

to be based on the belief that the Class 

B airspace modification would lead to 

an increased number of IFR and VFR 

flights operating at lower altitudes than 

they do today. This is incorrect. The 

Class B airspace modifications, 

including Area F, are based on the need 

to contain existing large turbinepowered IFR aircraft that are now 

operating below Class B airspace. It is 

important to note that existing DAL IFR 

arrival and departure operating 

altitudes, flight paths, traffic patterns, 

and procedures will not change. As 

stated in the NPRM, the Area F 

modification will continue to support 

IFR and VFR aircraft arriving and 

departing ADS as they do today without 

compression and ensure large turbinepowered aircraft flying instrument 

procedures to DAL runways 13L/13R 

are contained within Class B airspace. 

Five commenters argued that the FAA 

should not lower the Class B airspace 

over the entire Addison Class D airspace 

area. They believed it would create an 

unsafe condition with arrivals and 

departures to from ADS from the north 

and east would be forced to operate at 

the same, or close to the same altitudes; 

create the possibility of unintentional 

airspace incursions; and have 

operational issues associated with 

separation from the existing DAL traffic 

patterns at 1,600 feet MSL and 2,000 

feet MSL. Additionally, one of the 

commenters also argued that lowering 

the entire ADS Class D airspace to a 

2,500-foot MSL ceiling under the 3,000- 

foot MSL Class B airspace floor would 

result in a wedge of uncontrolled 

airspace above ADS to the north and 

east. 

As noted in the NPRM, the FAA 

reduced the lateral dimensions of Area 

F over the ADS Class D airspace to only 

extend from the 10-nautical mile (NM) 

arc from the Point of Origin to the 13– 

NM arc from the Point of Origin; 

matching the outer boundary with the 

adjacent Area B outer boundary at 13– 

NM arc from the Point of Origin, and 

not overlay the entire ADS Class D 

airspace. The ADS Class D airspace 

beyond the 13–NM arc is unchanged 

and the existing 3,000-foot MSL ceiling 

is unaffected by this rule. By lowering 

only the portion of Class B airspace 

necessary to contain aircraft flying 

instrument procedures to DAL within 

Class B airspace [Area F] and retaining 

the existing arrival/departure traffic 

flows, altitudes, and procedures, the 

concerns that the ADS arrival/departure 

aircraft from the north and east would 

be operating at the same altitudes are 

addressed. ADS arrival and departure 

aircraft will be unaffected and are not 

expected to create any unintentional 

Class B incursions or impact the two 

existing ADS traffic patterns. Finally, 

the ADS Class D airspace beyond the 

13–NM arc of the Point of Origin will 

remain unchanged by this airspace 

action. 

Thirty commenters stated that VFR 

flights operating at ADS would be 

compressed as a result of establishing 

Area F with a 2,500 feet MSL floor over 

a portion of the ADS Class D airspace. 

They further argue that this 

compression into less airspace at ADS, 

below Area F, could result in the loss of 

operational flexibility and options for 

VFR aircraft to vary from air traffic 

control (ATC) recommended arrival and 

departure altitudes; the introduction of 

new flight safety hazards to VFR pilots 

forced to fly 500 feet lower; a greater 

potential for midair collision; and 

inadvertent incursions into Class B 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES