Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 244 / Thursday, December 19, 2013 / Proposed Rules 76781 

substantial number of small entities, 

section 605(b) of the 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. 

The FAA believes the proposed rule 

would not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities, as the economic impact is 

expected to be minimal. If an agency 

determines that a rulemaking will not 

result in a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities, the head of the agency may so 

certify under section 605(b) of the RFA. 

Therefore, as provided in section 605(b), 

the head of the FAA certifies that this 

rulemaking will not result in 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 proposed rule and 

determined that it will enhance safety 

and is not considered an unnecessary 

obstacle to trade. 

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 

$143.1 million in lieu of $100 million. 

This proposed rule does not contain 

such a mandate; therefore, the 

requirements of Title II of the Act do not 

apply. 

Environmental Review 

This proposal will be subject to an 

environmental analysis in accordance 

with FAA Order 1050.1E, 

‘‘Environmental Impacts: Policies and 

Procedures,’’ prior to any FAA final 

regulatory action. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, 

Navigation (air). 

The Proposed Amendment 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

proposes to amend 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. 

* * * * * 

AEA PA B Philadelphia, PA [Amended] 

Philadelphia International Airport, PA 

(Primary Airport) 

(Lat. 39°52′20′′ N., long. 75°14′27′′ W.) 

Northeast Philadelphia Airport, PA 

(Lat. 40°04′55′′ N., long. 75°00′38′′ W.) 

Cross Keys Airport, NJ 

(Lat. 39°42′20′′ N., long. 75°01′59′′ W.) 

Boundaries. 

By removing the current description of 

Area G and adding in its place: 

Area G. That airspace extending upward 

from 3,500 feet MSL to and including 7,000 

feet MSL within a 20-mile radius of PHL, 

excluding that airspace south of a line 

beginning at the intersection of the PHL 20- 

mile radius and the 158° bearing from PHL, 

thence direct to the intersection of the PHL 

17.9-mile radius and the 138° bearing from 

PHL, and that airspace bounded by a line 

beginning at the intersection of the PHL 17.9- 

mile radius and the 138° bearing from PHL, 

thence direct to the intersection of the PHL 

15-mile radius and the 141° bearing from 

PHL, thence direct to the intersection of the 

Cross Keys Airport (17N) 1.5-mile radius and 

the 212° bearing from 17N, thence clockwise 

via the 1.5-mile radius of 17N to the 257° 

bearing from 17N, thence direct to the 

intersection of the 17N 1.5-mile radius and 

the 341° bearing from 17N, thence clockwise 

via the 1.5-mile radius of 17N to the 011° 

bearing from 17N, thence direct to the 

intersection of the PHL 15-mile radius and 

the 127° bearing from PHL, thence direct to 

the intersection of the PHL 20-mile radius 

and the 118° bearing from PHL, and Areas A, 

B, C, D, E and F. 

* * * * * 

Issued in Washington, DC, on December 

11, 2013. 

Ellen Crum, 

Acting Manager, Airspace Policy and 

Regulations Group. 

[FR Doc. 2013–30086 Filed 12–18–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 71 

[Docket No. FAA–2013–0859; Airspace 

Docket No. 13–AWA–4] 

RIN 2120–AA66 

Proposed Modification of Class B 

Airspace; Salt Lake City, UT 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: This action proposes to 

amend the description of Area C and 

Area O of the Salt Lake City Class B 

airspace area by raising the floor of a 

small portion of Class B airspace 

between the Salt Lake City Class B 

surface area and the Hill Air Force Base 

(AFB) Class D airspace area. This action 

proposes to raise the Class B airspace 

floor in the northeast corner of Area C 

from 6,000 feet mean seal level (MSL) to 

7,500 feet MSL, and redefine the new 

boundary segment using the power lines 

underlying the area. This would benefit 

and enhance non-participating VFR 

aircraft operations being flown north 

and south through the Salt Lake Valley 

over Interstate 15. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before February 3, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this 

proposal to the U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West 

Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590–0001; telephone: 

(202) 366–9826. You must identify FAA 

Docket No. FAA–2013–0859 and 

Airspace Docket No. 13–AWA–4 at the 

beginning of your comments. You may 

also submit comments through the 

Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
76782 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 244 / Thursday, December 19, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

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: 

Comments Invited 

Interested parties are invited to 

participate in this proposed rulemaking 

by submitting such written data, views, 

or arguments as they may desire. 

Comments that provide the factual basis 

supporting the views and suggestions 

presented are particularly helpful in 

developing reasoned regulatory 

decisions on the proposal. Comments 

are specifically invited on the overall 

regulatory, aeronautical, economic, 

environmental, and energy-related 

aspects of the proposal. 

Communications should identify both 

docket numbers (FAA Docket No. FAA– 

2013–0859 and Airspace Docket No. 13– 

AWA–4) and be submitted in triplicate 

to the Docket Management Facility (see 

ADDRESSES section for address and 

phone number). You may also submit 

comments through the internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

Commenters wishing the FAA to 

acknowledge receipt of their comments 

on this action must submit with those 

comments a self-addressed, stamped 

postcard on which the following 

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to 

Docket Nos. FAA–2013–0859 and 

Airspace Docket No. 13–AWA–4.’’ The 

postcard will be date/time stamped and 

returned to the commenter. 

All communications received on or 

before the specified closing date for 

comments will be considered before 

taking action on the proposed rule. The 

proposal contained in this action may 

be changed in light of comments 

received. All comments submitted will 

be available for examination in the 

public docket both before and after the 

closing date for comments. A report 

summarizing each substantive public 

contact with FAA personnel concerned 

with this rulemaking will be filed in the 

docket. 

Availability of NPRMs 

An electronic copy of this document 

may be downloaded through the 

Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. 

Recently published rulemaking 

documents can also be accessed through 

the FAA’s Web page at http://

www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/

rulemaking/recently_published/. 

You may review the public docket 

containing the proposal, any comments 

received and any final disposition in 

person in the Dockets Office (see 

ADDRESSES section for address and 

phone number) between 9:00 a.m. and 

5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. An informal 

docket may also be examined during 

normal business hours at the office of 

the Central Service Center, Operations 

Support Group, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 2601 Meacham Blvd. 

Fort Worth, TX 76137. 

Persons interested in being placed on 

a mailing list for future NPRMs should 

contact the FAA’s Office of Rulemaking, 

(202) 267–9677, for a copy of Advisory 

Circular No. 11–2A, Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking Distribution System, which 

describes the application procedure. 

Background 

On August 17, 2012, the FAA 

published a final rule modifying the Salt 

Lake City, UT Class B airspace area (77 

FR 49712) with an effective date of 

October 18, 2012. Subsequent to this 

effective date, the FAA determined that 

a portion of Area C, with its 6,000 foot 

MSL floor, was extended farther 

northeast (northeast corner of Area C) 

than necessary based on operational 

experience with the new Salt Lake City 

Class B airspace configuration. The 

portion of Class B airspace in the 

proposal overlies a short segment of a 

heavily used VFR flyway that follows 

Interstate 15 (I–15) between the Salt 

Lake City Class B surface area and Hill 

AFB Class D airspace area. However, 

VFR pilots not in contact with air traffic 

control use I–15 as a convenient and 

easily viewed landmark for VFR aircraft 

flying north and south through the Salt 

Lake Valley. The 6,000 foot MSL Class 

B airspace floor in the northeast corner 

of Area C causes problems for VFR 

aircraft transitioning this area. VFR 

pilots following I–15 have found it 

difficult to avoid the Class B airspace 

due to the 6,000 foot MSL floor and the 

lack of good landmarks in the area. In 

addition, air traffic controllers routing 

VFR aircraft through the area over I–15 

are required to either obtain and issue 

a Class B airspace clearance or vector 

the VFR aircraft north of the 6,000 foot 

MSL Class B airspace floor until clear of 

the area. 

Raising the floor of Class B airspace 

from 6,000 feet MSL to 7,500 feet MSL 

in the northeast corner of Area C, and 

using the power lines located west of I– 

15 as a visual reference to identify the 

boundary where Class B airspace with a 

6,000 foot MSL floor ends, would 

overcome the issues associated with 

Area C that are being experienced by 

VFR pilots and air traffic controllers. 

Additionally, raising the floor of Class B 

airspace in this area would significantly 

benefit and enhance VFR aircraft 

operations in the area without 

compromising containment of large 

turbine-powered aircraft conducting 

instrument procedures within Class B 

airspace. 

The Proposal 

The FAA is proposing an amendment 

to Title 14 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to modify 

the Salt Lake City Class B airspace area. 

This action proposes to raise the floor of 

a portion of Class B airspace in the 

northeast corner of Area C from 6,000 

feet MSL to 7,500 feet MSL. The portion 

of Class B airspace being raised lies 

northeast of the power lines running 

northwest and southeast under Area C 

and would be incorporated into the 

description of Area O, which has a 

7,500 foot MSL Class B airspace floor. 

The power lines under Area C would be 

used to visually define the new shared 

boundary between Area C and Area O 

in that area. These proposed 

modifications would enhance the safety 

and flow of VFR aircraft transitioning 

north and south in the Salt Lake Valley 

by following I–15, while continuing to 

support containment of large turbinepowered aircraft flying instrument 

procedures within Class B airspace. 

The FAA is not proposing any 

modification actions to the Salt Lake 

City Class B airspace Areas A, B, and D 

through N. The proposed modifications 

to the Salt Lake City Class B airspace 

Area C and Area O subareas are outlined 

below. 

Area C. Area C would include the 

airspace extending upward from 6,000 

feet MSL to 12,000 feet MSL. This 

action would redefine the northeast 

boundary of Area C by a line drawn 

west of and parallel to the power lines 

that run northwest and southeast 

between the TCH 006° radial 9.5-mile 

DME at lat. 41°00′28′′ N., long. 

111°57′36′′ W. and the TCH 016° radial 

8.1-mile DME at lat. 40°58′48′′ N., long. 

111°55′58′′ W. The floor of Class B 

airspace located immediately northeast 

of the power lines just described would 

be raised from 6,000 feet MSL to 7,500 

feet MSL and incorporated into the 

adjacent Area O. The remainder of Area 

C would be unchanged. 

Area O. Area O would include the 

airspace extending upward from 7,500 

feet MSL to 12,000 feet MSL. The 

boundary of the area would be realigned 

to match the segment of the power lines 

that run northwest and southeast 

between the TCH 006° radial 9.5-mile 

DME at lat. 41°00′28′′ N., long. 

111°57′36′′ W. and the TCH 016° radial 

8.1-mile DME at lat. 40°58′48′′ N., long. 

111°55′58′′ W. used to redefine the 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 244 / Thursday, December 19, 2013 / Proposed Rules 76783 

northeast boundary of Area C. The 

portion of Class B airspace incorporated 

into Area O would raise the floor of 

Class B airspace in that area from 6,000 

feet MSL to 7,500 feet MSL. The 

remainder of Area O would be 

unchanged. 

All radials listed in this proposed Salt 

Lake City Class B airspace area 

description modification are stated in 

degrees relative to True North. All 

geographic coordinates are stated in 

degrees, minutes, and seconds based on 

North American Datum 83. 

Implementation of the proposed 

modification to the Salt Lake City Class 

B airspace area would continue to 

ensure containment of large turbinepowered aircraft within Class B airspace 

as required by FAA directive. 

Additionally, this proposed action 

would allow VFR aircraft to transition 

east/west, north of the Salt Lake City 

Class B surface area, and north/south, to 

and from Salt Lake City airport, using I– 

15 as an easily identifiable visual 

landmark outside of Class B airspace 

below 7,500 feet MSL. This proposed 

modification would enhance the safety 

and efficient management of aircraft 

operations in the Salt Lake City, UT, 

terminal area. 

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 

71.1. The Class B airspace area listed in 

this document would be published 

subsequently in the Order. 

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 proposed 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 to 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 proposed rule. The reasoning for 

this determination follows: 

This proposed rule has the following 

benefits. 

This proposed rule would improve 

the flow of air traffic, enhance safety, 

and reduce the potential for midair 

collision in the Salt Lake City Class B 

airspace. 

Implementation of the proposed 

modification to the Salt Lake City Class 

B airspace area would continue to 

ensure containment of large turbinepowered aircraft within Class B airspace 

as required by FAA directive. 

Additionally, this proposed action 

would allow VFR aircraft to transition 

east/west, north of the Salt Lake City 

Class B surface area, and north/south, to 

and from Salt Lake City Airport, using 

I–15 as an easily identifiable visual 

landmark outside of Class B airspace 

below 7,500 feet MSL. This proposed 

modification would enhance the safety 

and efficient management of aircraft 

operations in the Salt Lake City, UT 

terminal area. 

The FAA believes that this proposed 

rule would result in minimal costs. 

The FAA has, therefore, determined 

that this proposed 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 objectives of the rule and of 

applicable statutes, to fit regulatory and 

informational requirements to the scale 

of the businesses, organizations, and 

governmental jurisdictions subject to 

regulation.’’ To achieve this principle, 

agencies are required 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 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 

RFA. 

However, if an agency determines that 

a rule is not expected to have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities, 

section 605(b) of the 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. 

The FAA believes the proposed rule 

would not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities as the economic impact is 

expected to be minimal. 

Therefore as the acting FAA 

Administrator, I certify that this 

proposed rule would 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 proposed rule and 

determined that it would enhance safety 

and would not be considered an 

unnecessary obstacle to trade. 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
76784 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 244 / Thursday, December 19, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

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 

$143.1 million in lieu of $100 million. 

This proposed rule does not contain 

such a mandate; therefore, the 

requirements of Title II of the Act do not 

apply. 

Environmental Review 

This proposal will be subject to an 

environmental analysis in accordance 

with FAA Order 1050.1E, 

‘‘Environmental Impacts: Policies and 

Procedures,’’ prior to any FAA final 

regulatory action. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, 

Navigation (air). 

The Proposed Amendment 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

proposes to amend 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. 

* * * * * 

ANM UT B Salt Lake City, UT [Amended] 

Salt Lake City International Airport (Primary 

Airport) 

(Lat. 40°47′18′′ N., long. 111°58′40′′ W.) 

Wasatch VORTAC (TCH) 

(Lat. 40°51′01′′ N., long. 111°58′55′′ W.) 

Hill AFB (HIF) 

(Lat. 41°07′26′′ N., long. 111°58′23′′ W.) 

Boundaries. 

By removing the current descriptions of 

Area C and Area O, and adding in its place: 

Area C. That airspace extending upward 

from 6,000 feet MSL to and including 12,000 

feet MSL, within an area bounded by a line 

beginning at the TCH 316° radial 11.6-mile 

DME at lat. 40°59′21′′ N., long. 112°09′33′′ W.; 

thence east to a point west of the power lines 

at the TCH 006° radial 9.5-mile DME at lat. 

41°00′28′′ N., long. 111°57′36′′ W.; thence 

southeast to a point west of the power lines 

at the TCH 016° radial 8.1-mile DME at lat. 

40°58′48′′ N., long. 111°55′58′′ W.; thence 

south to the TCH 020° radial 6.6-mile DME 

at lat. 40°57′13′′ N., long. 111°55′56′′ W.; 

thence west to a point southeast of Seagull 

Point on Antelope Island at the TCH 304° 

radial 9.3-mile DME at lat. 40°56′13′′ N., long. 

112°09′05′′ W.; thence north to the point of 

beginning. 

Area O. That airspace extending upward 

from 7,500 feet MSL to and including 12,000 

feet MSL, within an area bounded by a line 

beginning at the intersection of U.S. Highway 

89 and a 4.3-mile radius from Hill AFB at the 

TCH 014° radial 13.6-mile DME at lat. 

41°04′11′′ N., long. 111°54′39′′ W.; thence 

clockwise along the 4.3-mile radius from Hill 

AFB to 1700 South St. at the TCH 347° radial 

14.7-mile DME at lat. 41°05′20′′ N., long. 

112°03′21′′ W.; thence west along W. 1700 

South St. to the TCH 329° radial 16.8-mile 

DME at lat. 41°05′22′′ N., long. 112°10′20′′ W.; 

thence south to the TCH 316° radial 11.6- 

mile DME at lat. 40°59′21′′ N., long. 

112°09′33′′ W.; thence east to a point west of 

the power lines at the TCH 006° radial 9.5- 

mile DME at lat. 41°00′28′′ N., long. 

111°57′36′′ W.; thence southeast to a point 

west of the power lines at the TCH 016° 

radial 8.1-mile DME at lat. 40°58′48′′ N., long. 

111°55′58′′ W.; thence south to the TCH 020° 

radial 6.6-mile DME at lat. 40°57′13′′ N., long. 

111°55′56′′ W.; thence south to the 

intersection of Redwood Rd. and W. 500 

South St. at the TCH 049° radial 3.1-mile 

DME at lat. 40°53′02′′ N., long. 111°55′48′′ W.; 

thence south to Center St. at the TCH 102° 

radial 2.3-mile DME at lat. 40°50′32′′ N., long. 

111°55′57′′ W.; thence east along Center St. 

to I–15 at the TCH 099° radial 3-mile DME 

at lat. 40°50′32′′ N., long. 111°54′56′′ W.; 

thence north along I–15 to U.S. Highway 89 

at the TCH 024° radial 9-mile DME at lat. 

40°59′14′′ N., long. 111°54′05′′ W.; thence 

north along U.S. Highway 89 to the point of 

beginning. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on December 

12, 2013. 

Donna Warren, 

Acting Manager, Airspace Policy and 

Regulations Group. 

[FR Doc. 2013–30097 Filed 12–18–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 71 

[Docket No. FAA–2013–0915; Airspace 

Docket No. 12–ASO–41] 

RIN 2120–AA66 

Proposed Modification, Revocation, 

and Establishment of Area Navigation 

(RNAV) Routes; Charlotte, NC 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: This action proposes to 

establish two RNAV routes; modify 

three RNAV routes; and remove one 

RNAV route in the Charlotte, NC, area. 

The route changes are proposed to 

support the Charlotte Optimization of 

Airspace and Procedures in a Metroplex 

(OAPM) project. The proposed routes, 

in combination with existing VOR 

Federal airways, would provide 

additional routing options through and 

around the Metroplex airspace. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before February 3, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this 

proposal to the U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West 

Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590–0001; telephone: 

(202) 366–9826. You must identify FAA 

Docket No. FAA–2013–0915 and 

Airspace Docket No. 13–ASO–41 at the 

beginning of your comments. You may 

also submit comments through the 

Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul 

Gallant, 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: 

Comments Invited 

Interested parties are invited to 

participate in this proposed rulemaking 

by submitting such written data, views, 

or arguments as they may desire. 

Comments that provide the factual basis 

supporting the views and suggestions 

presented are particularly helpful in 

developing reasoned regulatory 

decisions on the proposal. Comments 

are specifically invited on the overall 

regulatory, aeronautical, economic, 

environmental, and energy-related 

aspects of the proposal. 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1