57376 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

SIAP at the airport. This action is 

necessary for the safety and 

management of IFR operations. 

The FAA has determined this 

regulation only involves an established 

body of technical regulations for which 

frequent and routine amendments are 

necessary to keep them operationally 

current. Therefore, this regulation: (1) Is 

not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ 

under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not 

a ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 

FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) 

does not warrant preparation of a 

regulatory evaluation as the anticipated 

impact is so minimal. Since this is a 

routine matter that will only affect air 

traffic procedures and air navigation, it 

is certified this rule, when promulgated, 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities under the criteria of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act. The FAA’s 

authority to issue rules regarding 

aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the 

U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, section 106 

discusses the authority of the FAA 

Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation 

Programs, describes in more detail the 

scope of the agency’s authority. This 

rulemaking is promulgated under the 

authority described in subtitle VII, part 

A, subpart I, section 40103. Under that 

section, the FAA is charged with 

prescribing regulations to assign the use 

of airspace necessary to ensure the 

safety of aircraft and the efficient use of 

airspace. This regulation is within the 

scope of that authority as it establishes 

additional controlled airspace at Ed 

Carlson Memorial Field-South Lewis 

County Airport, Toledo, WA. 

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 14 CFR 

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 7400.9U, 

Airspace Designations and Reporting 

Points, dated August 18, 2010, and 

effective September 15, 2010 is 

amended as follows: 

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas 

extending upward from 700 feet or more 

above the surface of the earth. 

* * * * * 

ANM WA, E5 Toledo, WA [New] 

Ed Carlson Memorial Field-South Lewis 

County Airport, WA 

(Lat. 46°28′38′′ N., long. 122°48′23′′ W.) 

That airspace extending upward from 700 

feet above the surface within a 6.9-mile 

radius of the Ed Carlson Memorial FieldSouth Lewis County Airport, and within 1 

mile each side of the 074° bearing from the 

Airport, extending from the 6.9-mile radius 

to 7.9 miles northeast of the airport. 

Issued in Seattle, Washington, on August 

30, 2010. 

John Warner, 

Manager, Operations Support Group, Western 

Service Center. 

[FR Doc. 2010–23392 Filed 9–20–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 71 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–0347; Airspace 

Docket No. 07–AWA–2] 

RIN 2120–AA66 

Modification of Class B Airspace; 

Chicago, IL 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This action modifies the 

Chicago, IL, Class B airspace area by 

expanding the existing airspace area to 

ensure containment of Instrument Flight 

Rules (IFR) aircraft conducting 

instrument approach procedures within 

Class B airspace, and segregating IFR 

aircraft arriving/departing Chicago 

O’Hare International Airport (ORD) and 

Visual Flight Rules (VFR) aircraft 

operating in the vicinity of the Chicago 

Class B airspace area. The additional 

Class B airspace will support 

simultaneous instrument approach 

procedure operations to ORD’s triple 

parallel runways today, as well as the 

three additional parallel runways (six 

total) planned for the near future. This 

action enhances safety, improves the 

flow of air traffic, and reduces the 

potential for midair collision in the 

Chicago terminal area, further 

supporting the FAA’s national airspace 

redesign goal of optimizing terminal and 

en route airspace areas to reduce aircraft 

delays and improve safety and 

efficiency of the National Airspace 

System (NAS). 

DATES: Effective Date: 0901 UTC, 

October 21, 2010. The Director of the 

Federal Register approves this 

incorporation by reference action under 

1 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 and Rules 

Group, Office of System Operations 

Airspace and AIM, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone: (202) 267–8783. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On May 14, 2010, the FAA published 

in the Federal Register a notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to modify 

the Chicago, IL, Class B airspace area 

(75 FR 27229). The FAA proposed this 

action to ensure containment of turbojet IFR aircraft conducting instrument 

approaches to ORD within the confines 

of Class B airspace and better segregate 

IFR aircraft arriving/departing ORD and 

non-participating VFR aircraft operating 

in the vicinity of the Chicago Class B 

airspace area. 

Interested parties were invited to 

participate in this rulemaking effort by 

submitting written comments on the 

proposal. In response to the NPRM, the 

FAA received 82 written comment 

submissions; of which, 7 were duplicate 

documents submitted by 4 commenters. 

Many of the commenters identified 

themselves as pilots who operate 

within, or through, the local area. All 

comments received were considered 

before making a determination on the 

final rule. An analysis of the comments 

received and the FAA’s responses are 

contained in the ‘‘Discussion of 

Comments’’ section below. 

Subsequent to the NPRM publication, 

the geographic coordinates in the 

aeronautical database for the ORD 

airport reference point (ARP), the 

Chicago Midway International Airport 

ARP, and the intersection of U.S. 

Highway 294 and the railroad tracks 

identified in Area B changed. The 

correct coordinates for the above have 

been incorporated into the Chicago 

Class B airspace area legal description 

contained in this final rule. 

Class B airspace designations are 

published in paragraph 3000 of FAA 

Order 7400.9U, dated August 18, 2010, 

and effective September 15, 2010, which 

is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 

71.1. The Class B airspace designations 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 57377 

listed in this document will be 

subsequently published in the Order. 

Discussion of Comments 

Six commenters expressed general 

opposition to the proposal stating they 

thought it was unnecessary. 

The FAA does not agree. As stated in 

the NPRM, the current Chicago Class B 

airspace area was established in 1993. 

Since then, ORD has experienced a 

significant increase in the number of 

aircraft operations and a substantial 

change in the fleet mix, with no change 

to the airspace configuration. The City 

of Chicago has completed airport 

infrastructure projects in recent years 

that enable simultaneous instrument 

approaches to three parallel runways 

that run west to east. Ongoing planned 

runway construction projects for the 

near future include building three 

additional parallel runways running 

west to east; transforming the 

operational flow of ORD to a West/East 

flow with six parallel runways when 

completed. 

FAA guidance requires air traffic 

controllers to vector IFR arrival aircraft 

to remain within Class B airspace once 

they’ve entered it. Today, turbo-jet 

aircraft flying simultaneous triple 

instrument approach procedures to ORD 

exceed the Class B airspace area 

boundaries; routinely entering, exiting, 

and re-entering the Class B airspace 

during their arrival. The procedural 

requirements associated with 

establishing arrival aircraft on 

simultaneous instrument approaches to 

three parallel runways result in aircraft 

exceeding the Class B airspace lateral 

boundaries by up to ten nautical miles 

(NM) during moderate traffic levels. As 

the additional runways planned for 

construction at ORD become operational 

and expected airport capacity increases, 

the number of aircraft exiting the Class 

B airspace during arrivals is also 

expected to increase; resulting in IFR 

turbo-jet air carrier arrivals flying in the 

very airspace that non-participating VFR 

general aviation and glider aircraft are 

also operating. 

Due to the existing and forecasted 

traffic volume, fleet mix, and 

operational complexity for controlling 

arrivals and departures at ORD and the 

immediate vicinity, the FAA has 

determined changing air traffic 

procedures alone will not retain IFR 

turbo-jet arrivals to ORD within the 

existing outdated Chicago Class B 

airspace configuration. The proposed 

airspace modification is the minimum 

needed to reasonably accommodate 

current and future aircraft operations at 

ORD and necessary to ensure flight 

safety and efficiency of operations at 

and in the vicinity of ORD for all users 

of the airspace. 

Sixty-six commenters, including the 

Aircraft Owners and Pilot Association 

and multiple Soaring Clubs in the area, 

requested that the floor of Area F be 

raised to 5,000 feet mean sea level 

(MSL). 

The FAA has determined it is not 

possible to raise the floor of Area F from 

4,000 feet MSL to 5,000 feet MSL. 

Aircraft conducting triple simultaneous 

approaches at ORD cannot be assigned 

the same altitude during turn-on to the 

final approach course; they must be 

assigned an altitude that differs by at 

least 1,000 feet from the altitude of the 

other two aircraft conducting 

simultaneous approaches. 

Specifically, when conducting triple 

simultaneous instrument approaches 

during an east flow, aircraft will be 

turned onto and established on final 

approach courses at 4,000 feet MSL for 

runway 9L (the northern most runway), 

7,000 feet MSL or above for runway 9R 

(the center runway), and 5,000 feet MSL 

and 6,000 feet MSL for runway 10 (the 

southernmost runway currently). When 

runway 10C becomes operational, it will 

be used as the southernmost arrival 

runway and mark the time when ORD 

will transition to become primarily a 

west flow or east flow operation. 

Traffic must be established on the 

respective localizers in a manner which 

allows for standard IFR (1,000 feet 

vertical) separation to be maintained 

until the aircraft is switched to the 

parallel monitor frequency. In reality, 

this means that the minimum point that 

the 4,000 feet MSL traffic (north 

runway) needs to be established is 3 NM 

from the point that the adjoining final’s 

aircraft descend below 5,000 feet MSL. 

The traffic that turns on at 5,000 feet 

MSL or 6,000 feet MSL (south runway) 

needs to be established 3 NM from the 

point that the adjoining final’s aircraft 

descend below 7,000 feet MSL. These 

minimum ‘‘turn on points’’ are located 

about 20 NM west of ORD for east flow 

operations. The base legs for aircraft 

flying to the north and south runways 

will need to be an additional few miles 

west of those points to meet their ‘‘turn 

on’’ requirements. Additionally, for both 

north and south runways, air traffic 

controllers will be sequencing aircraft 

from two or more arrival streams, 

necessitating the use of multiple 

altitudes in the arrival descent areas, 

until lateral separation is established. 

Under some projected traffic scenarios, 

multiple altitude downwind patterns 

will be utilized, with traffic ‘‘layered’’ by 

altitude and worked by separate 

controllers. During periods of heavy 

arrival demand, it is expected that the 

length of finals will extend to 25–30 NM 

routinely, as is the case today during 

west flow operations. 

The described scenario addresses 

triple simultaneous Instrument Landing 

System approaches. When runway 10R 

opens and becomes operational, the 

situation will become compounded as 

the Chicago TRACON begins conducting 

‘‘quad’’ operations. The procedures for 

controlling quad approaches are in the 

early planning stages. 

Sixty commenters stated that a floor 

of 4,000 feet MSL for Area F would 

adversely affect safety. The safety 

factors cited included ill effects due to 

compression, decreased possibility of 

safe landing during in-flight 

emergencies, inability to avoid the Class 

B airspace, and inability for gliders to 

maintain sufficient altitude during 

departure and arrival. 

The FAA acknowledges that some 

compression will occur. Nonparticipating VFR general aviation and 

glider aircraft will have their choice of 

flying either above or below the Class B 

airspace, or circumnavigating it five to 

ten NM further west to remain clear 

should they decide not to contact 

Chicago TRACON (C90) to receive Class 

B services. However, this is necessary to 

contain arriving IFR turbo-jet aircraft 

flying instrument approaches to ORD 

within Class B airspace once they’ve 

entered it, and will enhance flight safety 

to all by segregating the large turbo-jet 

aircraft and the non-participating VFR 

aircraft operating in the vicinity of the 

Chicago Class B airspace area. 

The FAA notes that the proposal will 

affect glider operations. While the Area 

F Class B airspace extension proposed 

to the west of ORD brings Class B 

airspace closer to the airfields where 

gliders operate, the original airspace 

extension to the west was reduced in 

size as much as possible in response to 

concerns expressed by the glider 

community during the ad hoc 

committee meetings and included in 

their final report. Subsequently, Area F 

was designed to ensure it does not 

encompass or overlay the airfields 

where the Sky Soaring Glider Club 

(Hampshire, IL) and the Windy City 

Soaring Association (Hinkley, IL) 

operations are located; as well as the 

Chicago Glider Club (Minooka, IL) 

which lies well south of any proposed 

Chicago Class B airspace area 

modifications. 

Based on the dimensions of Area F 

having been reduced at the 

recommendation and request of the 

glider community, the FAA feels the 

success for a safe landing would be no 

different than it would be in other areas 

of the present day Class B airspace 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with RULES
57378 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

where the floor is 4,000 feet MSL or 

less. 

The FAA does not agree that nonparticipating pilots will have difficulty 

avoiding the Area F Class B airspace 

extension. The legal description of the 

airspace area includes a mixture of 

prominent visual landmark references, 

geographic coordinates, and arcs 

defined off distance measuring 

equipment (DME) navigation aids. The 

FAA believes this mix of descriptors 

should be sufficient and effective in 

assisting pilots to identify the lateral 

limits of Area F. 

Lastly, the FAA acknowledges the 

concerns of the glider community 

during departure and arrival phases of 

flight should they continue to fly in the 

Class E airspace under the Area F Class 

B airspace extension and resist seeking 

alternative airspace that may allow them 

to climb to higher altitudes on departure 

and during sustained flights. Great effort 

was taken to ensure the Class B airspace 

extension was minimized to the 

absolute essential dimensions and to 

ensure it does not encompass or overlay 

airfields that gliders routinely operate 

from to minimize impacts to their flight 

operations. 

The four factors cited above, however, 

do not negate the need for the project. 

At the present time, large turbo-jet air 

carriers, general aviation, and glider 

aircraft are flying simultaneously in the 

airspace proposed to become Area F due 

to the outdated design of the Chicago 

Class B airspace area. Moving forward 

with the Class B airspace modification 

will enhance flight safety for all 

operators flying within, through, or near 

the Chicago Class B airspace area. 

Twenty-two commenters stated that 

proposed Area F with a floor of 4,000 

feet MSL would have negative effects to 

general aviation aircraft such as delays, 

or would have negative effects overall 

on glider operations. The negative 

effects included difficulty of training 

new glider pilots and diminished 

livelihood for instructors and tow pilots. 

The FAA notes that similar concerns 

of adverse impact were raised by 

commenters responding to the informal 

airspace meetings and offers the 

following, also addressed in the NPRM. 

The proposed Area F Class B airspace 

extension extending west of ORD 

incorporates a portion of Class E 

airspace that currently lies to the west 

of the boundary of the existing Area F, 

which currently has a 4,000 feet MSL 

floor, of the Chicago Class B airspace 

area. It is understandable that users of 

that Class E airspace view the 

establishment of Class B airspace there 

as an encroachment; however, in the 

interest of flight safety, the FAA has 

determined that the proposed Area F 

airspace extension to the west of ORD 

is necessary. The extension will contain 

IFR arrival aircraft flying triple 

simultaneous instrument approaches to 

ORD within Class B airspace throughout 

their approach, segregate IFR aircraft 

arriving to and departing from ORD and 

non-participating VFR aircraft in the 

vicinity of ORD from one another, and 

ensure a safer flying environment for all 

airspace users in the busy terminal 

airspace around ORD. 

The Area F Class B airspace extension 

was limited to include only the volume 

of airspace necessary to support triple 

simultaneous instrument approaches. 

Although Area F brings Class B airspace 

closer to the airfields where gliders 

operate, the original airspace extension 

to the west was reduced in size as much 

as possible in response to concerns 

expressed by the glider community 

during the ad hoc committee meeting 

process. Additionally, as noted above, 

Area F was designed to ensure it does 

not encompass or overlay the airfields 

where the Sky Soaring Glider Club and 

the Windy City Soaring Association 

operations are located; the Chicago 

Glider Club lies well south of any 

proposed Class B airspace 

modifications. 

The FAA maintains it is necessary to 

separate the large turbo-jet aircraft 

arriving and departing ORD and the 

non-participating VFR aircraft to ensure 

flight safety for all flying within, 

through, or near the Chicago Class B 

airspace area. 

One commenter suggested VFR 

corridors be established northwest/ 

southeast and northeast/southwest 

directly over ORD at 1,500 feet MSL to 

2,000 feet MSL. Another commenter 

offered that the proposal would 

adversely affect the VFR flyway along 

the Fox River and a third commenter 

stated additional VFR flyways should be 

established to the east, the west, and 

directly over the airspace, and that they 

should be northbound or southbound 

only. 

The FAA does not agree. Establishing 

VFR corridors at 1,500 feet MSL to 2,000 

feet MSL directly over ORD through the 

Class B airspace surface area are not 

feasible. VFR corridors provide general 

aviation flight paths for pilots planning 

flights into, out of, or through complex 

terminal airspace so as to avoid Class B 

airspace. ORD fans departures off the 

airport covering as much as 270 degrees 

around the compass using a 

combination of parallel and diagonal 

runways. Depending upon the runway 

configuration in use, establishing low 

altitude corridors as suggested would 

conflict with the over 1,300 departures 

daily, on average, and force departures 

to be restricted below the corridor 

altitude until clear of the corridor. 

Additionally, IFR aircraft arriving and 

departing ORD, as well as departing 

Chicago Midway, Aurora, DuPage, and 

Milwaukee Mitchell airports, commonly 

occupy this airspace area. 

The FAA also does not agree that the 

VFR flyway along the Fox River would 

be affected by the proposed 

modification. VFR flyways are not 

addressed in regulatory airspace 

proposals or determinations, but in 

accordance with FAA Order 7210.3, 

Facility Administration and Procedures, 

processing requirements. However, the 

FAA notes that the floor of the existing 

Class B airspace area over the Fox River 

is 4,000 feet MSL and remains the same 

in the proposed modification. The 

existing suggested altitude for the VFR 

flyway along the Fox River is charted at 

or below 3,500 feet MSL. The VFR 

flyway along the Fox River is unaffected 

by existing Class B airspace and will 

remain unaffected by the Chicago Class 

B airspace area modification. 

Currently, there are three VFR 

flyways, that run north and south, west 

of ORD and one flyway that runs north 

and south, east of ORD. The flyways to 

the west utilize a river, roads, and 

railroad tracks, whereas the flyway to 

the east utilizes the Lake Michigan 

shoreline. The FAA believes the existing 

three VFR flyways are sufficient to 

support non-participating aircraft flying 

in the vicinity of ORD. 

Two commenters requested that the 

floor of the Class B airspace over Lake 

Michigan be raised from 3,000 feet MSL 

(Area C) and 3,600 feet MSL (Area D) to 

4,000 feet MSL or 4,500 feet MSL, citing 

safety as the reason. One of the 

commenters stated that raising the floor 

would increase options for pilots. 

The FAA has determined it is not 

possible to raise the floor altitude for 

Areas C and D, as requested. No 

modifications were proposed for these 

areas as the existing airspace structure 

was deemed sufficient to continue 

supporting and protecting IFR aircraft 

flying triple simultaneous instrument 

approaches during west flow operations 

and non-participating VFR aircraft 

flying along the Lake Michigan 

shoreline. Although the commenters 

cited safety reasons as the basis for their 

suggestion, there are no known safety 

issues for that airspace today. The FAA 

recognizes that raising the Area C and 

D Class B airspace floors would increase 

options (additional transit altitudes and 

airspace over Lake Michigan) for nonparticipating VFR pilots operating east 

of ORD; however, the Class B airspace 

in Areas C and D protects the 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 57379 

instrument approaches flown to 

runways 22L and 27R, specifically. 

Two commenters stated that the 

airspace contained in Area F below 

5,000 feet MSL is unusable for 

instrument approaches. One of those 

commenters also stated that the FAA 

has indicated that the altitudes below 

6,000 feet MSL are unusable in Area F 

on the west side of the Class B airspace 

due to traffic from satellite airports. 

The FAA does not agree. These 

statements are incorrect. In fact, IFR 

aircraft flying instrument approach 

procedures to ORD today operate below 

6,000 feet MSL in the airspace proposed 

to be Area F. As mentioned previously 

in response to the public’s comments to 

raise the floor of Area F to 5,000 feet 

MSL, when conducting triple 

simultaneous instrument approaches 

during an east flow, aircraft will be 

turned onto and established on final 

approach courses at 4,000 feet MSL for 

runway 9L (the northern most runway), 

7,000 feet MSL or above for runway 9R 

(the center runway), and 5,000 feet MSL 

and 6,000 feet MSL for runway 10 (the 

southernmost runway currently). When 

runway 10C becomes operational, it will 

be used as the southernmost arrival 

runway and mark the time when ORD 

will transition to become primarily a 

west flow or east flow operation. 

Traffic must be established on the 

respective localizers in a manner that 

allows for standard IFR (1,000 feet 

vertical) separation to be maintained 

until the aircraft is switched to the 

parallel monitor frequency. This means 

that the minimum point that the 4,000 

feet MSL traffic (north runway) needs to 

be established is 3 NM from the point 

that the adjoining final’s aircraft 

descend below 5,000 feet MSL. The 

traffic that turns on at 5,000 feet MSL or 

6,000 feet MSL (south runway) needs to 

be established 3 NM from the point that 

the adjoining final’s aircraft descend 

below 7,000 feet MSL. These minimum 

‘‘turn on points’’ are located about 20 

NM west of ORD for east flow 

operations. Additionally, for both north 

and south runways, air traffic 

controllers will be sequencing aircraft 

from two or more arrival streams, 

necessitating the use of multiple 

altitudes in the arrival descent areas, 

until lateral separation is established. 

Under some projected traffic scenarios, 

multiple altitude downwind patterns 

will be utilized, with traffic ‘‘layered’’ by 

altitude, including the airspace between 

4,000 feet MSL and 6,000 feet MSL. 

Thirty-one commenters thought the 

railroad tracks near Hampshire, IL, 

should be used as a visual landmark to 

define the northern boundary of Area F 

between the 25 NM and 30 NM arcs. 

Thirty of those commenters thought that 

doing so would increase safety with 

regard to gliders avoiding the Class B 

airspace area. 

The FAA does not agree. As stated in 

the NPRM, the FAA finds this 

suggestion impractical. The resultant 

dimension of the Area F extension 

would be insufficient laterally between 

the runway 9L centerline extended and 

the northern boundary of the area to 

safely ensure separation between 

aircraft flying in the runways 9L, 9R, 

and 10 downwind traffic patterns and 

aircraft flying along the Area F 

boundary and final approach courses. 

Additionally, issues associated with 

establishing Area F with an insufficient 

amount of airspace dimensionally will 

only be compounded when the three 

additional parallel runways that are 

planned become operational. 

The FAA also notes that a second set 

of railroad tracks parallel to the railroad 

tracks near the town of Hampshire, IL, 

run approximately three NM to the 

south. Although commenters believed 

that using the visually identifiable 

railroad tracks near Hampshire, IL, 

would increase safety with regard to 

gliders avoiding the Chicago Class B 

airspace area, the opportunity for a pilot 

to misidentify the correct set of railroad 

tracks defining the boundary challenges 

that perspective. A pilot unfamiliar with 

the local area, encountering weather, or 

confused in flight for any number of 

reasons could misidentify the railroad 

tracks near Hampshire, IL, with those 

railroad tracks running parallel 

approximately three NM south near 

Burlington, IL, and unintentionally 

intrude into the Chicago Class B 

airspace area. 

Two commenters stated that Area F 

was not necessary because departure 

aircraft from ORD did not conflict with 

instrument approach traffic in that area. 

The FAA agrees that aircraft departing 

ORD do not conflict with aircraft flying 

instrument approaches in that area. 

However, the FAA does not agree that 

Area F is not necessary. Area F is 

intended to contain IFR turbo-jet aircraft 

flying instrument approach procedures 

to runways 9L, 9R, and 10 within Class 

B airspace. It also will segregate IFR 

turbo-jet aircraft from non-participating 

GA and glider aircraft from operating 

within the same volume of airspace. 

This will ensure a safe flying 

environment for all aircraft flying in or 

near Area F. 

One commenter stated that aircraft are 

more fuel efficient at higher altitudes 

and, consequently, the proposal would 

increase fuel consumption for air 

transport aircraft. Another stated that 

the proposal would increase fuel 

consumption for general aviation 

aircraft. 

The FAA does not agree that the Class 

B airspace area modification will 

increase fuel consumption for air 

transport aircraft. The FAA is taking 

action to modify the existing Class B 

airspace to contain IFR arrival aircraft 

flying instrument approach procedures 

within Class B airspace based on 

operational procedures today. This 

action aims to overcome IFR arrival 

aircraft entering, exiting, and reentering 

the Chicago Class B airspace area during 

arrival. This modification represents the 

minimum airspace needed to reasonably 

accommodate current operations and 

flight tracks at ORD. Since air traffic 

control will continue using existing 

approach procedures, altitudes, and 

flight tracks for the same fleet mix it is 

serving today, fuel consumption for air 

transport aircraft being controlled today 

is expected to remain the same in the 

future. Finally, as the existing flight 

tracks, altitude use, and approach 

procedures will not change as a result 

of modification to the Class B, this 

modification is not expected to have any 

fuel consumption impact on air 

transport aircraft. 

The FAA recognizes that the Class B 

airspace modification could increase 

fuel burn for non-participating VFR 

aircraft. Areas E and F are the new Class 

B airspace areas that could affect nonparticipating VFR aircraft. In order to 

remain clear of the Chicago Class B 

airspace area, non-participating VFR 

pilots who decide not to contact the 

Chicago TRACON for Class B services 

will either have to fly lower or further 

east or west of ORD. However, this is 

necessary to separate them and the large 

turbo-jet aircraft being contained within 

the Class B airspace area. While some 

aircraft would need to fly additional 

distances or at different altitudes, the 

FAA believes any increase use of fuel 

would be minimal and be justified by 

the increase in overall safety. 

One commenter stated that the floor 

of Area D over Joliet was too low, the 

airspace proposal would adversely 

affect Chicago Midway Airport (MDW) 

traffic, and that aircraft on approach to 

MDW should be at a higher altitude. 

The FAA does not agree. The Joliet 

Regional Airport lies outside the 

Chicago Mode C veil (30 NM from ORD) 

in an area unaffected by the Chicago 

Class B airspace modification. Area D in 

the existing Chicago Class B airspace 

area is unchanged in the modification of 

the Chicago Class B airspace and 

continues to be over 5 NM away from 

Joliet Regional Airport. Since there are 

no proposed changes to Area D, the 

FAA does not believe there will be any 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with RULES
57380 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

adverse affects to IFR arrival and 

departure operations to and from MDW. 

Additionally, the FAA considers the 

approach procedures to MDW to be safe, 

appropriate, and supportive of 

operations there; therefore, the approach 

procedures will not change as a result 

of this action. 

Two commenters stated that the 

proposal would have noise impacts 

because arrival aircraft would be flying 

at lower altitudes. Additionally, one of 

those commenters asked if an 

environmental impact study or noise 

study had been done and if the FAA had 

notified communities that aircraft 

would be flying over them at lower 

altitudes. 

The FAA does not agree. In 

accordance with FAA Order 1050.1, 

Environmental Impacts: Policies and 

Procedures, paragraph 311a, rulemaking 

actions that modify Class B airspace are 

categorically excluded from the 

requirement to prepare an 

environmental assessment or 

environmental impact statement. The 

FAA determined that there were no 

extraordinary circumstances that would 

have necessitated further environmental 

review. The location of present day 

flight tracks and altitude use will not 

change as a result of modification to the 

Class B airspace area. Jet aircraft will 

continue to fly the same flight tracks 

and patterns in the same locations that 

they fly today. There will be no adverse 

effects on any of the environmental 

impact categories required to be 

analyzed in accordance with FAA Order 

1050.1; neither will there be any 

cumulative impacts. Moreover, the FAA 

prepared an environmental impact 

statement in July of 2005, and a record 

of decision in September of 2005, for 

construction and operation of the new 

runways at ORD. As such, there is no 

requirement for a noise study or public 

notification. 

One commenter thought that undue 

priority was given to the safety needs of 

IFR aircraft destined for ORD and MDW; 

second priority was given to separation 

between IFR and VFR traffic; and last 

priority was given to uncontrolled 

aircraft. This commenter added that 

positive separation could not 

realistically occur for uncontrolled 

aircraft and thought policymakers 

should not favor one group over 

another. 

The FAA does not agree that priority 

is given to the safety needs of IFR over 

VFR aircraft. Title 49 of U.S. Code, 

Section 40103, Sovereignty and use of 

airspace, charges the FAA to develop 

plans and policy for the use of the 

navigable airspace and assign by 

regulation or order the use of the 

airspace necessary to ensure the safety 

of all aircraft and the efficient use of 

airspace. This action, once established, 

will ensure containment of turbo-jet IFR 

aircraft conducting instrument 

approaches to ORD within the confines 

of Class B airspace and better segregate 

IFR aircraft arriving/departing ORD and 

non-participating VFR aircraft operating 

in the vicinity of the Chicago Class B 

airspace area. The containment of the 

IFR turbo-jet arrivals into ORD within 

Class B airspace enables the segregation 

of those aircraft from non-participating 

VFR aircraft and enhances safety system 

for all aircraft (IFR and VFR) equally. 

The FAA agrees that positive 

separation cannot be provided for 

aircraft not in communication with air 

traffic control. FAA Order 7110.65, Air 

Traffic Control, prescribes the 

separation standards between IFR 

aircraft and between VFR/IFR aircraft 

that air traffic controllers must apply to 

IFR aircraft they are controlling. This 

action is aimed at ensuring the safety of 

all aircraft, IFR and VFR equally, that 

will be operating in and around the 

Chicago Class B airspace area. 

The Rule 

The FAA is amending Title 14 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) 

part 71 to modify the Chicago Class B 

airspace area. This action (depicted on 

the attached chart) modifies several 

areas within the existing Chicago Class 

B airspace area and establishes two 

Class B airspace extensions; one to the 

east and a second to the west to provide 

necessary airspace for containment of 

turbo-jet IFR aircraft conducting 

approach operations within the confines 

of Class B airspace once they have 

entered it and to better segregate the IFR 

aircraft arriving/departing ORD and the 

non-participating VFR aircraft operating 

in the vicinity of the Chicago Class B 

airspace area. The modifications to the 

Chicago Class B airspace area are 

discussed below. 

Area A. The northern boundary of 

Area A is modified by incorporating the 

airspace east of U.S. Highway 12 

between the 6 NM and 5 NM arcs of the 

Chicago O’Hare VOR/DME antenna, 

from 2,500 feet MSL to and including 

10,000 feet MSL, as part of Area G. The 

airspace east of U.S. Highway 12 

between the 6 NM and 5 NM arcs of the 

Chicago O’Hare VOR/DME antenna, 

below 2,500 feet MSL, are returned to 

the NAS. This modification of Area A 

raises the floor of the Class B airspace 

in the affected segment from the surface 

to 2,500 feet MSL to provide additional 

airspace to accommodate aircraft on the 

downwind traffic pattern and circling 

approaches to Runway 34 at Chicago 

Executive Airport, without entering 

Chicago Class B airspace. 

Area B. The northeast boundary of 

Area B is redefined using visually 

identifiable railroad tracks that run from 

U.S. Highway 294 to Willow Road 

(slightly east of the existing Area B, 

Area C, and current Area E shared 

boundary). Additionally, Area B is 

expanded to incorporate a portion of 

existing Class B airspace contained in 

the current Area E (specifically, the 

airspace contained east of the railroad 

tracks and south of Willow Road within 

the current Area E) and lowers the floor 

of that affected airspace to 1,900 feet 

MSL. This modification of Area B raises 

the floor of the Class B airspace west of 

the railroad tracks westward to the 

existing shared boundary noted above to 

3,000 feet MSL, but lowers the floor of 

the Class B airspace in the affected 

segment of the current Area E to 1,900 

feet MSL. This modification 

incorporates only that airspace deemed 

necessary from the current Area E to 

ensure IFR arrival aircraft flying 

instrument approaches to ORD Runway 

22R are contained within the confines of 

Class B airspace throughout the 

approach, and ensures segregation of 

IFR arrival aircraft from VFR aircraft 

flying near the boundary of Class B 

airspace. Additionally, this modification 

better defines the northeast boundary of 

Area B using visual references. 

Area C. Area C is expanded by 

incorporating portions of existing Class 

B airspace (Areas B and E), from 3,000 

feet MSL to and including 10,000 feet 

MSL, commensurately. As described in 

the Areas B and H modification 

paragraphs (above and below), the new 

shared boundary follows railroad tracks 

that run northeast from U.S. Highway 

294 to the 10 NM arc of the Chicago 

O’Hare VOR/DME antenna. Other than 

re-defining the shared boundary of the 

new Areas B, C, and H using a visual 

reference for pilots flying in the vicinity 

of the Chicago Class B airspace, there is 

no effect to IFR or VFR aircraft 

operations from this modification. 

Area D. Area D is unchanged. 

Area E. Area E is a newly established 

airspace extension to the east of the 

existing Chicago Class B airspace area 

over Lake Michigan. This establishment 

extends Class B airspace from the 

existing Area D boundary defined by the 

25 NM arc of the Chicago O’Hare VOR/ 

DME antenna to the 30 NM arc of the 

Chicago O’Hare VOR/DME antenna. The 

northern boundary is defined by 

latitude/longitude points that lay along 

Federal airways V–100/V–526, and the 

southern boundary is defined by 

latitude/longitude points that lay along 

Federal airways V–6/V–10. This new 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 57381 

Area E extends upward from 4,000 feet 

MSL to and including a ceiling of 

10,000 feet MSL to ensure IFR arrival 

aircraft flying simultaneous instrument 

approaches to the existing runways 27R, 

27L, and 28, as well as the three 

additional parallel runways planned for 

the near future, are contained within the 

confines of Class B airspace throughout 

their approach; ensure segregation of 

IFR aircraft arriving ORD and nonparticipating VFR aircraft operating in 

the vicinity of the Chicago Class B 

airspace area; and provide navigable 

airspace below and above for VFR 

aircraft operations. 

Area F. Area F is expanded to the 

west of ORD to establish an airspace 

extension to the west of the existing 

Chicago Class B airspace area, similar to 

Area E to the east. Specifically, this 

modification extends the western 

boundary of the current Area F to a 

uniform 25 NM arc of the Chicago 

O’Hare VOR/DME antenna and then 

further extends a portion of the western 

boundary to include the airspace 

between the 25 NM and 30 NM arcs of 

the Chicago O’Hare VOR/DME antenna. 

The northern boundary of the extension 

to the 30 NM arc is defined by the 

intersection of Interstate 90 and the 25 

NM arc of the Chicago O’Hare 

VOR/DME antenna, then due west to lat. 

42°07′21′′ N., long. 88°33′05′′ W., on the 

30 NM arc of the Chicago O’Hare VOR/ 

DME antenna; and the southern 

boundary of the extension to the 30 NM 

arc is defined by Illinois State Route 10 

between the 25 NM and 30 NM arcs of 

the Chicago O’Hare VOR/DME antenna. 

This new Area F extends upward from 

4,000 feet MSL to and including 10,000 

feet MSL to ensure IFR arrival aircraft 

flying simultaneous instrument 

approaches to the existing runways 9L, 

9R, and 10, as well as the three 

additional parallel runways planned for 

the near future, are contained within the 

confines of Class B airspace throughout 

their approach; to ensure segregation of 

IFR aircraft arriving ORD and nonparticipating VFR aircraft operating in 

the vicinity of the Chicago Class B 

airspace area; and to provide navigable 

airspace below and above for VFR 

aircraft operations. 

Area G. The southern boundary of 

Area G is modified by incorporating the 

airspace contained in Area A that lies 

east of U.S. Highway 12 between the 6 

NM and 5 NM arcs of the Chicago 

O’Hare VOR/DME antenna, extending 

upward from 2,500 feet MSL to and 

including 10,000 feet MSL. This 

modification of Area G raises the floor 

of the Class B airspace in the affected 

segment from the surface to 2,500 feet 

MSL to provide additional airspace to 

accommodate aircraft on the downwind 

traffic pattern and circling approaches 

to Runway 34 at Chicago Executive 

Airport, without entering Chicago Class 

B airspace. 

Area H. Area H is established from the 

existing northern portion of the current 

Area E. This new area is bordered by the 

10 NM arc of the Chicago O’Hare 

VOR/DME antenna on the east, Willow 

Road on the south, and the railroad 

tracks (located slightly east of the 

existing Area B, Area C, and Area E 

shared boundary) that run from U.S. 

Highway 294 to the 10 NM arc of the 

Chicago O’Hare VOR/DME antenna on 

the west. This new area extends upward 

from 2,500 feet MSL to and including 

10,000 feet MSL. 

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 final rule. 

Regulatory Evaluation Summary 

Changes to Federal regulations must 

undergo several economic analyses. 

First, Executive Order 12866 directs that 

each Federal agency shall propose or 

adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned 

determination that the benefits of the 

intended regulation justify its costs. 

Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

of 1980 (Pub. L. 96–354) requires 

agencies to analyze the economic 

impact of regulatory changes on small 

entities. Third, the Trade Agreements 

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

from setting standards that create 

unnecessary obstacles to the foreign 

commerce of the United States. In 

developing U.S. standards, 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: 

This final rule enhances safety by 

containing all instrument approach 

procedures and associated traffic 

patterns within the confines of Class B 

airspace. The requirements support 

increased operations and capacity to the 

current and planned parallel runways 

while better segregating aircraft that will 

be operating in the affected airspace. 

As stated in the NPRM, we are aware 

that this final rule might require small 

adjustments to existing VFR flyway 

planning charts and perhaps some 

increased general aviation fuel 

consumption. After consultation with a 

diverse cross-section of stakeholders 

that participated in the ad hoc 

committee, and as we received no 

adverse comments regarding the 

economic analysis, we have determined 

that this final rule will result in minimal 

cost. 

This final rule will enhance safety, 

reduce the potential for a midair 

collision in the Chicago terminal area, 

and will improve the flow of air traffic. 

As such, we estimate a minimal impact 

with substantial positive net benefits. 

The FAA has, therefore, 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. 

Final 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 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with RULES
57382 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

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. 

Our initial determination was that the 

rule would not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. We received 

no public comments regarding our 

initial determination. As such, this final 

rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities because the 

economic impact is expected to be 

minimal. 

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 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 effect of this final 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 final rule does not contain such a 

mandate; therefore, the requirements of 

Title II of the Act do not apply. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, 

Navigation (air). 

The Rule 

■ 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 7400.9U, 

Airspace Designations and Reporting 

Points, dated August 18, 2010, and 

effective September 15, 2010, is 

amended as follows: 

Paragraph 3000 Subpart B—Class B 

Airspace. 

* * * * * 

AGL IL B Chicago, IL 

Chicago O’Hare International Airport 

(Primary Airport) 

(Lat. 41°58′54′′ N., long. 87°54′24′′ W.) 

Chicago Midway Airport 

(Lat. 41°47′10′′ N., long. 87°45′09′′ W.) 

Chicago O’Hare VOR/DME 

(Lat. 41°59′16′′ N., long. 87°54′17′′ W.) 

Boundaries. 

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°04′10′′ N., long. 87°55′31′′ 

W.; thence clockwise along the 5 NM arc of 

the Chicago O’Hare VOR/DME to lat. 

41°59′15′′ N., long. 87°47′35′′ W.; thence east 

to lat. 41°59′15′′ N., long. 87°46′15′′ W.; 

thence clockwise along the 6 NM arc of the 

Chicago O’Hare VOR/DME to Interstate 

Highway 290 (lat. 41°57′12′′ N., long. 

88°01′56′′ W.); thence north along Interstate 

Highway 290 to the 6 NM arc of the Chicago 

O’Hare VOR/DME (lat. 42°01′20′′ N., long. 

88°01′51′′ W.); thence clockwise along the 6 

NM arc of the Chicago O’Hare VOR/DME to 

U.S. Highway 12 (lat. 42°05′03′′ N., long. 

87°56′26′′ W.); thence southeast along U.S. 

Highway 12 to the point of beginning. 

Area B. That airspace extending upward 

from 1,900 feet MSL to and including 10,000 

feet MSL within an area bounded by a line 

beginning at the intersection of U.S. Highway 

294 and railroad tracks at lat. 42°03′58′′ N., 

long. 87°51′58′′ W.; thence northeast along 

the railroad tracks to Willow Road (lat. 

42°06′20′′ N., long. 87°49′38′′ W.); thence east 

along Willow Road to the 10 NM arc of the 

Chicago O’Hare VOR/DME (lat. 42°06′04′′ N., 

long. 87°44′28′′ W.); thence clockwise along 

the 10 NM arc of the Chicago O’Hare VOR/ 

DME to the 5 NM radius of Chicago Midway 

Airport (lat. 41°49′34′′ N., long. 87°51′00′′ 

W.); thence counterclockwise along the 5 NM 

radius of the Chicago Midway Airport to the 

10.5 NM arc of the Chicago O’Hare VOR/ 

DME (lat. 41°48′59′′ N., long. 87°51′22′′ W.); 

thence clockwise along the 10.5 NM arc of 

the Chicago O’Hare VOR/DME to the 10 NM 

radius of the Chicago Midway Airport (lat. 

41°49′11′′ N., long. 87°58′14′′ W.); thence 

clockwise along the 10 NM radius of Chicago 

Midway Airport to the 10 NM arc of the 

Chicago O’Hare VOR/DME (lat. 41°49′40′′ N., 

long. 87°58′05′′ W.); thence clockwise along 

the 10 NM arc of the Chicago O’Hare VOR/ 

DME to U.S. Highway 12 (lat. 42°08′02′′ N., 

long. 88°00′44′′ W.); thence southeast along 

U.S. Highway 12 to the 5 NM arc of the 

Chicago O’Hare VOR/DME (lat. 42°04′10′′ N., 

long. 87°55′31′′ W.); thence clockwise along 

the 5 NM arc of the Chicago O’Hare VOR/ 

DME to the point of beginning, excluding 

that airspace designated as Area A. 

Area C. That airspace extending upward 

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

feet MSL within an area bounded by the 15 

NM arc of the Chicago O’Hare VOR/DME, 

excluding that airspace designated as Area A, 

Area B, Area G, and Area H. 

Area D. That airspace extending upward 

from 3,600 feet MSL to and including 10,000 

feet MSL within an area bounded by a line 

beginning at lat. 42°07′52′′ N., long. 88°10′47′′ 

W.; thence northwest to the 25 NM arc of the 

Chicago O’Hare VOR/DME (lat. 42°15′40′′ N., 

long. 88°19′39′′ W.); thence clockwise along 

the 25 NM arc of the Chicago O’Hare VOR/ 

DME to lat. 41°42′03′′ N., long. 88°18′34′′ W.; 

thence northeast to the 15 NM arc of the 

Chicago O’Hare VOR/DME (lat. 41°49′53′′ N., 

long. 88°09′59′′ W.); thence clockwise along 

the 15 NM arc of the Chicago O’Hare VOR/ 

DME to the point of beginning, excluding 

that airspace designated as Area A, Area B, 

Area C, Area G, and Area H. 

Area E. 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 lat. 42°11′11′′ N., long. 87°24′46′′ 

W.; thence east to the 30 NM arc of the 

Chicago O’Hare VOR/DME (lat. 42°10′39′′ N., 

long. 87°17′01′′ W.); thence clockwise along 

the 30 NM arc of the Chicago O’Hare VOR/ 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 57383 

DME to lat. 41°46′38′′ N., long. 87°17′51′′ W.; 

thence west to the 25 NM arc of the Chicago 

O’Hare VOR/DME (lat. 41°46′40′′ N., long. 

87°25′22′′ W.); thence counterclockwise along 

the 25 NM arc of the Chicago O’Hare VOR/ 

DME 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 lat. 42°07′52′′ N., long. 88°10′47′′ 

W.; thence northwest to the 25 NM arc of the 

Chicago O’Hare VOR/DME (lat. 42°15′40′′ N., 

long. 88°19′39′′ W.); thence counterclockwise 

along the 25 NM arc of the Chicago O’Hare 

VOR/DME to Interstate 90 (lat. 42°07′22′′ N., 

long. 88°26′01′′ W.); thence west to the 30 

NM arc of the Chicago O’Hare VOR/DME (lat. 

42°07′21′′ N., long. 88°33′05′′ W.); thence 

counterclockwise along the 30 NM arc of the 

Chicago O’Hare VOR/DME to Illinois State 

Route 10 (lat. 41°49′49′′ N., long. 88°32′27′′ 

W.); thence east along Illinois State Route 10 

to the 25 NM arc of the Chicago O’Hare VOR/ 

DME (lat. 41°50′40′′ N., long. 88°25′44′′ W.); 

thence counterclockwise along the 25 NM arc 

of the Chicago O’Hare VOR/DME to lat. 

41°42′03′′ N., long. 88°18′34′′ W.; thence 

northeast to the 15 NM arc of the Chicago 

O’Hare VOR/DME (lat. 41°49′53′′ N., long. 

88°09′59′′ W.); thence clockwise along the 15 

NM arc of the Chicago O’Hare VOR/DME to 

the point of beginning. 

Area G. 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 lat. 42°04′14′′ N., long. 87°54′56′′ 

W.; thence northwest to the 10 NM arc of the 

Chicago O’Hare VOR/DME (lat. 42°09′00′′ N., 

long. 87°57′22′′ W.); thence counterclockwise 

along the 10 NM arc of the Chicago O’Hare 

VOR/DME to U.S. Highway 12 (lat. 42°08′02′′ 

N., long. 88°00′44′′ W.); thence southeast 

along U.S. Highway 12 to the 5 NM arc of 

the Chicago O’Hare VOR/DME (lat. 42°04′10′′ 

N., long. 87°55′31′′ W.); thence clockwise 

along the 5 NM arc of the Chicago O’Hare 

VOR/DME to the point of beginning. 

Area H. 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 Willow Road 

and railroad tracks at lat. 42°06′20′′ N., long. 

87°49′38′′ W.; thence northeast along the 

railroad tracks to the 10 NM arc of the 

Chicago O’Hare VOR/DME (lat. 42°08′06′′ N., 

long. 87°48′02′′ W.); thence clockwise along 

the 10 NM arc of the Chicago O’Hare VOR/ 

DME to Willow Road (lat. 42°06′04′′ N., long. 

87°44′28′′ W.); thence west along Willow 

Road to the point of beginning. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on September 

15, 2010. 

Edith V. Parish, 

Manager, Airspace and Rules Group. 

[FR Doc. 2010–23470 Filed 9–20–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 71 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–0325; Airspace 

Docket No. 10–AWP–2] 

Modification of Class E Airspace; 

Willcox, AZ 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This action will amend 

existing Class E airspace at Willcox, AZ, 

to accommodate aircraft using a new 

Area Navigation (RNAV) Global 

Positioning System (GPS) Standard 

Instrument Approach Procedures 

(SIAPs) at Cochise County Airport. This 

will improve the safety and 

management of Instrument Flight Rules 

(IFR) operations at the airport. 

DATES: Effective date, 0901 UTC, 

November 18, 2010. The Director of the 

Federal Register approves this 

incorporation by reference action under 

1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual 

revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and 

publication of conforming amendments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Eldon Taylor, Federal Aviation 

Administration, Operations Support 

Group, Western Service Center, 1601 

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, WA 98057; 

telephone (425) 203–4537. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

History 

On June, 14, 2010, the FAA published 

in the Federal Register a notice of 

proposed rulemaking to amend 

controlled airspace at Willcox, AZ (75 

FR 33561). Interested parties were 

invited to participate in this rulemaking 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with RULESER21AU10.004</GPH>