[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 167 (Thursday, August 28, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45526-45529]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-22972]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Airspace Docket No. 93-AWA-16]
RIN 2120-AA66


Modification of Class D Airspace South of Abbotsford, British 
Columbia (BC), on the United States Side of the U.S./Canadian Border, 
and the Establishment of a Class C Airspace Area in the Vicinity of 
Point Roberts, Washington (WA)

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This action establishes a Class C airspace area in the United 
States (U.S.), southeast of Vancouver, BC, in the vicinity of Point 
Roberts, WA. The Vancouver Class C airspace area will have a ceiling of 
12,500 feet Mean Sea Level (MSL), and a floor of 2,500 feet MSL. In 
addition, this action extends the existing Abbotsford, BC, Class D 
airspace area west into airspace which is currently Class E airspace, 
and lowers the ceiling of the Class D airspace area from 3,000 to 2,500 
feet MSL in U.S. airspace. The FAA is taking these actions pursuant to 
a proposal by Transport Canada, and to assist Transport Canada in its 
efforts to reduce the risk of midair collision, enhance safety, and 
improve air traffic flows within the Vancouver and Abbotsford, BC, 
International Airport areas.

EFFECTIVE DATE: 0901 UTC, November 6, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ken McElroy, Airspace and Rules 
Division, ATA-400, Office of Air Traffic Airspace Management, Federal 
Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 
20591; telephone: (202) 267-8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    In July 1994, Transport Canada proposed to extend the Vancouver, 
BC, Class C airspace area across the United States/Canadian border into 
U.S. airspace in the vicinity of the San Juan Islands and Bellingham, 
WA. As proposed, the Class C airspace area would have extended from 
Abbotsford Airport, across Bellingham Airport, to a point south of San 
Juan Island. Transport Canada's proposal was part of its overall 
airspace plan for the Vancouver area, centering around efforts to 
mitigate near mid-air collision potential between instrument flight 
rule (IFR) and unknown visual flight rule (VFR) aircraft in U.S. 
airspace where Canada provides air traffic services.
    Class C airspace consists of controlled airspace extending upward 
from the surface or higher to specified altitudes within which all 
aircraft are subject to the operating rules and equipment requirements 
specified in Federal Aviation Regulations. Two-way radio communication 
must be established with the air traffic control (ATC) facility 
providing ATC services prior to entry and thereafter maintained while 
operating within Class C airspace. The standard Class C airspace area 
consists of that airspace within 5 Nautical Miles (NM) of the primary 
airport, extending from the surface to an altitude of 4,000 feet above 
that airport's elevation, and that airspace between 5 and 10 NM from 
the primary airport from 1,200 feet above the surface to an altitude of 
4,000 feet above that airport's elevation. Proposed deviations from 
this standard have been necessary at some airports because of adjacent 
regulatory airspace, international boundaries, topography, or unusual 
operational requirements.
    The Class C airspace area proposed by Transport Canada differed 
from most other Class C airspace areas in that it was to an extension 
of a foreign Class C airspace area serving a primary airport outside 
the U.S.; standard U.S. Class C airspace configurations and dimensions 
were therefore unsuitable.
    Transport Canada's proposal also included a proposal to extend the 
western boundary of the Abbotsford, BC, Class D airspace area 
approximately 7 nautical miles (NM) west of its present location, and 
to lower the ceiling of the Class D airspace from 3,000 feet MSL to 
2,500 feet MSL.
    Class D airspace is, generally, that airspace from the surface to 
2,500 feet above the airport elevation (charted in MSL) surrounding 
those airports that have an operational control tower. The 
configuration of each Class D airspace area is individually tailored 
and the airspace will normally be designed to contain any published 
instrument approach procedures. Two-way radio communication must be 
established with the ATC facility providing ATC services prior to entry 
and thereafter maintained while operating in the Class D airspace.
    The Vancouver and Abbotsford Airports are both international and 
public-use airports located in Canada. Passenger enplanements reported 
at Vancouver in 1995 were 312,000, up from 301,000 in 1994. This volume 
of passenger enplanements and aircraft operations meets the FAA 
criteria for establishing a Class C airspace area to enhance safety.

Public Meetings

    As announced in the Federal Register on March 22, 1995 (60 FR 
15172), two pre-NPRM airspace meetings were held on May 9-10, 1995, in 
Friday Harbor and Bellingham, WA. The purpose of these meetings was to 
provide local airspace users with an opportunity to present input on 
the Transport Canada proposal prior to initiating any regulatory 
action. In the ensuing comment period, which closed on July 10, 1995, 
over 300 comments were received in overwhelming opposition to the 
proposal. The majority of the opposition centered around the 
significant amount of airspace affected by the original proposal. The 
original proposal would have required the reclassification of airspace 
in five contiguous areas from Abbotsford Airport, across Bellingham 
Airport, to a point south of San Juan Island. Subsequent meetings were 
held between

[[Page 45527]]

Transport Canada, FAA, and general aviation (GA) groups in an effort to 
address the public's concerns. These meetings resulted in an agreement 
to revise Transport Canada's July 1994 proposal. Of the original five 
airspace areas, only three would be recommended for inclusion in the 
revised proposal. This revision significantly reduced the amount of 
Class C airspace required.
    On April 5, 1996, the FAA published a notice of public meeting (61 
FR 15331) to announce another informal airspace meeting, which was held 
on May 6, 1996, in Friday Harbor, WA. This meeting provided local 
airspace users with an opportunity to present input on the revised 
proposal for the design of the Vancouver and Abbotsford, BC, Class C 
and D airspace areas.
    On March 18, 1997, the FAA published an NPRM (62 FR 12892) 
proposing to designate a Class C airspace area in the vicinity of Point 
Roberts, WA, and to extend the Class D airspace area at Abbotsford, BC, 
on the United States side of the U.S./Canadian border. Interested 
parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking proceeding by 
submitting comments on the proposal to the FAA. The comment period 
closed May 2, 1997. The FAA received one comment in support of the 
proposal and no comments objecting to the proposal.

The Rule

    This amendment to part 71 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 
CFR part 71) establishes the Vancouver Class C airspace area in the 
vicinity of Point Roberts, WA, and modifies the existing Class D 
airspace at Abbotsford, BC. The Class C airspace designation applies to 
an area lying within U.S. airspace along the U.S./Canadian border. This 
action addresses only that airspace contained within the U.S. 
Implementation of the Class C airspace area and the modification of the 
Class D airspace area will promote the efficient control of air traffic 
and reduce the risk of midair collision in the terminal area.
    The effective date for this final rule does not correspond with a 
scheduled publication date for the appropriate aeronautical chart for 
this area. The Vancouver Class C airspace area and the modifications to 
the Abbotsford Class D airspace area will, therefore, be published on 
the Seattle Sectional Aeronautical Chart effective January 1, 1998. In 
the interim, the FAA will disseminate the information contained in this 
final rule in the notices to Airmen publication, and will publish a 
special notice in the Airport/Facility Directory. Additionally, the 
FAA's Northwest Mountain Regional Office will distribute Letters to 
Airmen that will advertise the implementation of this final rule.
    The coordinates in this document are based on North American Datum 
83. Class C and Class D airspace designations are published in 
paragraphs 4000 and 5000, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.9D, dated 
September 4, 1996, and effective September 16, 1996, which is 
incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class C and Class D 
airspace areas listed in this document will be published subsequently 
in the Order.

Regulatory Evaluation Summary

    Proposed and final rule 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 
requires agencies to analyze the economic effect of regulatory changes 
on small entities. Third, the Office of Management and Budget directs 
agencies to assess the effect of regulatory changes on international 
trade. In conducting these analyses, the FAA has determined that this 
Final Rule: (1) Will generate benefits that justify its minimal costs 
and is not ``a significant regulatory action'' as defined in the 
Executive Order; (2) is not significant as defined in Department of 
Transportation's Regulatory Policies and Procedures; (3) will not have 
a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities; (4) 
will not constitute a barrier to international trade; and (5) will not 
contain any Federal intergovernmental or private sector mandate, and 
that the requirements of Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 
of 1995 do not apply. These analyses are summarized here in the 
preamble and the full Regulatory Evaluation is in the docket.

Cost-Benefits Analysis

    The FAA has determined that the establishment of a Class C airspace 
area in the vicinity of Point Roberts, WA, and Vancouver, BC, and a 
modification of the Class D airspace area south of Abbotsford, BC, will 
result in minimal, if any, cost to either the agency or aircraft 
operators. The FAA has determined, in conjunction with Transport 
Canada, that the establishment of Class C and modification of Class D 
airspace will promote the efficient control of air traffic and reduce 
the risk of midair collision in the terminal area.
    Upon implementation of this rule, pursuant to a letter of agreement 
between the Nav-Canada and FAA, Nav-Canada will provide a traffic 
control services, such as traffic advisories, and separation and 
sequencing services, to aircraft operating within the Vancouver Class C 
and Abbotsford Class D airspace areas.
    The FAA, in supporting Transport Canada, has determined that the 
establishment of Class C and modification of Class D airspace areas in 
the vicinity of Point Roberts, WA, Vancouver, and Abbotsford, BC, will 
impose minimal, if any, cost to either aircraft operators or the FAA. 
Those potential cost components (navigational equipment for aircraft 
operators and operations support equipment for the FAA, including 
additional cost for air traffic controllers) that could be imposed by 
the rule are discussed as follows:

Establishment of Class C Airspace

    Aircraft operators will incur minimal, if any, costs from 
compliance with the final rule. This assessment is based on the most 
recent General Aviation and Avionics Survey Report. The report 
indicates an estimated 82 percent of all GA aircraft operators are 
already equipped with the necessary equipment required to operate in a 
Class C airspace area (i.e., two-way radios and Mode C transponders). 
Further, the FAA has determined there will be insignificant cost to GA 
operators who utilize circumnavigation procedures to avoid the Class C 
and Class D airspace area, or who fly beneath the 2,500 feet MSL floor. 
Therefore, the FAA has determined that the final rule will impose 
minimal, if any, additional cost impact on circumnavigating operators.

Establishment of Class D Airspace

    Aircraft operators will incur minimal, if any, costs from 
compliance with the rule. This assessment is based on the most recent 
General Aviation and Avionics Survey Report. The report indicates an 
estimated 85 percent of all GA aircraft operators are already equipped 
with the necessary equipment to operate in a Class D airspace area 
(i.e., two-way radios). The FAA has determined that nonparticipating 
operators will be able to circumnavigate the Class D airspace area by 
altering their current flight paths between 2 and 7 NM to avoid the 
newly designated airspace. Therefore, the FAA has determined that the 
final rule will impose minimal, if any, costs onto nonparticipating 
aircraft operators.

[[Page 45528]]

    A letter of agreement between the FAA and Transport Canada was 
signed on May 1, 1995, which establishes standard procedures for 
coordinating air traffic operations between Seattle Air Route Traffic 
Control Center and Vancouver Air Control Centre. The Letter of 
Agreement establishes the ATC responsibilities for each of the centers. 
The U.S. has relinquished control of the Class C and Class D airspace 
areas to Canada. Canadian ATC currently provides radar service for the 
additional 10 NM radar area that the final rule will establish. In 
addition, NAV-Canada already provides VFR Advisory Service for the 
Class D airspace area.
    The FAA will not incur any additional charting or pilot education 
expenses as a result of the modifications incurred from the final rule. 
The FAA currently revises sectional charts every six months. Changes of 
these types are required and made routinely to depict Class C and Class 
D airspace areas during these cycles, and are considered an ordinary 
operating cost. Further, pilots will not incur any additional costs 
obtaining current charts depicting Class C and Class D airspace areas 
because they use only the most current charts.
    In order to advise the public of changes to airspace areas, the FAA 
holds informal public meetings at each location where Class C 
establishments or modifications are proposed. These meetings provide 
pilots with the best opportunity to learn about Class C airspace 
operating procedures in the areas. The routine expenses associated with 
these public meetings are incurred regardless of whether Class C is 
ultimately established. If either of the airspace changes occur, the 
FAA will distribute a Letter to Airmen to all pilots residing within 50 
miles of the Class C airspace site which will explain modifications to 
aircraft operation and airspace configuration. In addition, FAA 
district offices conduct aviation safety seminars on a regular basis. 
These seminars are provided by the FAA to discuss a variety of aviation 
safety issues, including Class C airspace areas. The one-time incurred 
cost of the Letter to Airmen will be $550 (1996 dollars). This one-time 
negligible cost will be incurred upon the establishment of the Class C 
airspace.
    In view of the benefits of enhanced aviation safety, operational 
efficiency, and the minimal, if any, cost of compliance, the FAA has 
determined that the final rule will be cost-beneficial.

Final Regulatory Flexibility Determination

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) was enacted by 
Congress to ensure that small entities are not unnecessarily and 
disproportionately burdened by Federal regulations. The RFA requires a 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis if a final rule will have ``significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.'' FAA Order 
2100.14A outlines the FAA's procedures and criteria for implementing 
the RFA.
    The small entities that potentially may incur minimal, if any, cost 
with the implementation of this rule are operators of aircraft which do 
not meet Class C or Class D navigational equipment standards. The small 
entities potentially impacted by the rule (primarily parts 121 and 135 
aircraft without two-way radios and Mode C transponders) will not incur 
any additional cost for navigational equipment because they routinely 
fly into airspace where those requirements are already in place. As the 
result of the previously implemented ``Mode C rule,'' all of these 
commercial operators are assumed to have Mode C transponders. 
Therefore, the FAA has determined that the final rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    In view of the enhancement to aviation safety, and operational 
efficiency, and the minimal cost of compliance, the FAA has determined 
that this rule will be cost-beneficial.

International Trade Impact Assessment

    This final rule will not constitute a barrier to international 
trade, including the export of American goods and services to foreign 
countries and the import of foreign goods and services into the United 
States. This assessment is based on the fact that the rule will not 
impose costs on aircraft operators or aircraft manufacturers (U.S. or 
foreign).

Unfunded Mandate Assessment

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (the Act), 
enacted as Pub. L. 104-4 on March 22, 1995, requires each Federal 
agency, to the extent permitted by law, to prepare a written assessment 
of the effects of any Federal mandate in a proposed or final agency 
rule that may result in the 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. Section 
204(a) of the Act, 2 U.S.C. 1534(a), requires the Federal agency to 
develop an effective process to permit timely input by elected officers 
(or their designees) of State, local and tribal governments on a final 
``significant intergovernmental mandate.'' A ``significant 
intergovernmental mandate'' under the Act is any provision in a Federal 
agency regulation that will impose an enforceable duty upon State, 
local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate of $100 million 
(adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year. Section 203 of the 
Act, 2 U.S.C. 1533, which supplements Section 204(a), provides that 
before establishing any regulatory requirements that might 
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, the agency shall 
have developed a plan that, among other things, provides for notice to 
potentially affected small governments, if any, and for a meaningful 
and timely opportunity to provide input in the development of 
regulatory proposals.
    This final rule does not contain any Federal intergovernmental or 
private sector mandate. Therefore, the requirements of Title II of the 
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 do not apply.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation 
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, CLASS B, CLASS C, CLASS D, AND 
CLASS E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIRWAYS; 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.


Sec. 71.1  [Amended]

    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal 
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9D, Airspace Designations and 
Reporting Points, dated September 4, 1996, and effective September 16, 
1996, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 4000--Subpart C--Class C Airspace

* * * * *

ANM BC C Vancouver, BC [New]

Vancouver International Airport, BC, Canada
    (Lat. 49 deg.11'38''N, long. 123 deg.11'04''W)
Vancouver VORTAC
    (Lat. 49 deg.04'38''N, long. 123 deg.08'57''W)


[[Page 45529]]


    That airspace extending upward from 2,500 feet MSL to and 
including 12,500 feet MSL beginning at lat. 49 deg.00'00''N, long. 
123 deg.19'20''W; thence east along the U.S./Canadian boundary to 
lat. 49 deg.00'05''N, 122 deg.33'50''W; thence south to lat. 
48 deg.57'59''N, long. 122 deg.33'50''W; thence west to lat. 
48 deg.57'59''N, long. 122 deg.47'12''W; thence southwestward via a 
16 NM arc of the Vancouver VORTAC to lat. 48 deg.49'52''N, long. 
123 deg.00'31''W; thence northwest along the U.S./Canadian boundary 
to the point of beginning, excluding the airspace overlying the 
territory of Canada.
* * * * *

Paragraph 5000--Subpart D--Class D Airspace

* * * * *

ANM BC D Abbotsford, BC [Revised]

Abbotsford Airport, BC, Canada
    (Lat. 49 deg.01'31''N, long. 122 deg.21'48''W)
Vancouver VORTAC
    (Lat. 49 deg.04'38''N, long. 123 deg.08'57''W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to 2,500 feet 
MSL beginning at lat. 48 deg.57'59''N, long. 122 deg.18'57''W, 
thence counterclockwise along the 4-mile radius of the Abbotsford 
Airport to lat. 49 deg.00'05''N, 122 deg.16'08''W; thence west along 
the US-Canadian border to lat. 49 deg.00'05''N, long. 
122 deg.45'58''W, thence clockwise along the 16-mile ARC of the 
Vancouver VORTAC, to lat. 48 deg.57'59''N, long. 122 deg.47'12''W; 
thence east along lat. 48 deg.57'59''N to the point of beginning; 
excluding the airspace within the Vancouver, BC, Class C airspace 
and the airspace west of long. 122 deg.33'50''W below 1,500 feet 
MSL, and the airspace overlying the territory of Canada.
* * * * *
    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 20, 1997.
Reginald C. Matthews,
Acting Program Director for Air Traffic Airspace Management.
[FR Doc. 97-22972 Filed 8-27-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P