[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 79 (Tuesday, April 23, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17826-17828]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-9992]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 71
[Airspace Docket No. 95-ANM-19]
Establishment of Class D Airspace; Vancouver, Washington
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action establishes Class D airspace at Pearson Field,
Vancouver, Washington. This action is necessary to
[[Page 17827]]
enhance safety within the area which was previously excluded from the
Portland International Airport (PDX) Class C airspace and commonly
referred to as the Pearson Cutout. A minor change is also being made to
the airport name, formerly called Pearson Airpark, and to the
geographic coordinates of Pearson Field, Vancouver, Washington.
EFFECTIVE DATE: June 20, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
James C. Frala, Operations Branch, ANM-532.4, Federal Aviation
Administration, Docket No. 95-ANM-19, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
Washington 98055-4056; telephone number: (206) 227-2535.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
History
On November 9, 1995, the FAA proposed to amend part 71 of the
Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 71) to establish Class D
airspace at Pearson Field, Vancouver, Washington (60 FR 56539). This
proposal was the product of an airspace and procedural review of new
instrument approach procedures to PDX and an analysis of the Pearson
Field/Portland International utilization of airspace west of PDX. This
rule was proposed to minimize potential conflicts and mitigate wake
turbulence concerns. The proposed establishment of Class D airspace at
Pearson Field requires pilots operating in the airspace to be in
communication with the controlling Air traffic facility so that traffic
information and wake turbulence advisories can be issued. Interested
parties were invited to participate in the rulemaking proceeding by
submitting written comments on the proposal. This action is the same as
the proposal except the airport name and coordinates have been changed
in this document to reflect information published in the National
Flight Data Digest Number 226, dated November 24, 1995. Additionally, a
change is made to reflect the dates and times the Class D airspace area
is effective.
Discussion of Comments
A total of 17 individuals submitted written comments to FR Doc. 95-
27830, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) 95-ANM-19. Additionally,
verbal comments were expressed by some of the approximately 350 persons
attending informal aviation gatherings. The FAA considered these
comments in the adoption of this rule. Comments submitted on NPRM 95-
ANM-19 reflect the views of a broad spectrum of the aviation public
including individuals and organizations representing commercial and
general aviation pilots. Organizations that commented include Air Line
Pilots Association (ALPA); Delta Air Lines, Inc.; Port of Portland;
Experimental Aircraft Association; The City of Vancouver, Washington;
Clark County Airport Owners and Managers Association; and the
Washington Pilots Association.
Of the 17 who submitted written comments to the docket, 6
commenters supported and 11 commenters opposed the establishment of
Class D airspace. Of the 6 supporting comments, 5 commenters agreed
that this action would promote safety for users at both PDX and Pearson
Field.
One commenter (ALPA) would support the establishment of Class D
airspace if additional restrictions, such as requiring an operating
transponder, segregating Pearson Field traffic from PDX traffic, and
lowering the Pearson Field traffic pattern altitude to 700 feet mean
sea level, were included in the proposed action. These suggested
restrictions were evaluated and determined to be excessive and not
necessary for safety. Lowering the Pearson Field pattern altitude to
700 feet would place pilots in closer proximity to terrain and to
people and property on the ground. This option was rejected because it
contradicts the purpose of the rule which is to enhance safety.
Of the 11 commenters opposing the rule, one commenter felt that the
proposed action was an attempt to close Pearson Field. The FAA did not
consider closing Pearson Field as an option. Rather, the FAA is
committed to mitigating airspace management issues when airports are in
close proximity to each other. The purpose of this rulemaking is to
allow Pearson Field to continue to operate safely in close proximity to
its larger neighbor. Three commenters felt that the proposed action
would introduce jet traffic to a new route over Pearson Field and in
close proximity to downtown Vancouver, Washington. Four commenters
expressed concern for increased jet noise. The establishment of Class D
airspace introduces a communication requirement only. No new jet routes
will result from this action and this airspace action does not alter
existing flight tracks. Jet noise will not be altered by this rule. Two
commenters suggested that the approaches to PDX should be offset to the
south to avoid conflicts in traffic flows. This option is not viable
for two reasons. First, the rising terrain and obstructions southwest
of the airport create serious safety obstacles to safe instrument
approaches. Second, if it was feasible to offset the approaches to the
south, the approach minimums would be very high due to the terrain and
the fact that the approach would not be aligned with the runway. As a
result, offsetting the approaches would have an adverse effect on
airport capacity. Three commenters expressed concerns for wake
turbulence generated by aircraft landing and departing PDX. The FAA
shares these concerns as demonstrated by this rule that is intended to
facilitate the transfer of wake turbulence information to Pearson Field
users. In addition to the traffic and wake turbulence advisories
resulting from this rule, the FAA has agreed to assist in presentation
of wake turbulence training for Pearson Field operators and to publish
cautionary advisories where appropriate.
Two commenters were opposed to the action due to the additional
cockpit workload of radio communications and the financial burden of
acquiring a radio. The FAA recognizes that the requirement for radio
communications will have some impact on users at Pearson Field,
particularly those who do not have radio-equipped aircraft. However,
due to the proximity of the two airports and the need to minimize
potential conflicts and mitigate wake turbulence concerns, some
airspace safety change is necessary. Prior to this rulemaking, FAA Air
Traffic and Flight Standards personnel met with customer
representatives for Pearson Field and PDX to seek solutions and
minimize impacts on users at the airports. It was generally agreed that
establishing Class D airspace at Pearson Field would satisfy safety
concerns while imposing the least restrictions on users. Furthermore,
the FAA and Pearson pilots are developing procedures for no-radio
aircraft operations at Pearson Field.
The Clark County Airport Owners and Managers Association objects to
this proposed action suggesting it violates their constitutional
rights. They claim Grandfather Rights to the airspace in and around
their airports because those airports were in existence many years
prior to PDX. Title 49 United States Code, section 40103 charges the
FAA with the responsibility to regulate the use of airspace for
efficiency and safety. As mentioned previously, the purpose of this
rule is to preserve safe operations at Pearson. This rule does not
address the operation of PDX or the effects of that airport's
operations on surrounding airports other than Pearson.
One commenter provided comments that were unrelated to the
proposal.
During the comment period, verbal responses relating to this
proposed airspace action were heard at several
[[Page 17828]]
aviation gatherings. Instructions and the appropriate address for
submitting written comments were disseminated to the approximately 360
pilots at those gatherings who expressed an interest in this
rulemaking. Verbal comments from those gatherings were noted. In
general, most pilots of aircraft equipped with electrical systems
expressed agreement with the rule. There was a suggestion that a
control tower may be necessary at Pearson. However, others felt a
control tower was neither needed nor wanted. In fact, the activity
level at Pearson does not approach the level established by the FAA to
support a control tower. Some expressed concern that traffic at Pearson
would be delayed for PDX traffic either by denying access to the Class
D airspace for aircraft arriving at Pearson, or by requiring aircraft
departing Pearson Field to hold on the ground until separation from PDX
traffic could be achieved. Separation services are not provided for
aircraft operating under visual flight rules in Class D airspace. Air
Traffic will not be controlling the flow of aircraft arriving at or
departing from Pearson.
The Rule
This amendment to part 71 of Federal Aviation Regulations
establishes Class D airspace at Pearson Field, Vancouver, Washington.
The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore, (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 that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.
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 amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:
PART 71--[AMENDED]
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; 14 CFR 11.69.
Sec. 71.1 [Amended]
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9C, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 17, 1995, and effective September 16,
1995, is amended as follows:
Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace
* * * * *
ANM WA D Vancouver, WA
Vancouver, Pearson Field, WA
(lat. 45 deg.37'14''N, long. 122 deg.39'23''W)
Portland International Airport, OR
(lat. 45 deg.35'19''N, long 122 deg.35'51''W)
That airspace extending upward from the surface to but not
including 1,100 feet MSL in an area bounded by a line beginning at
the point where the 019 deg. bearing from Pearson Field intersects
the 5-mile arc from Portland International Airport extending
southeast to a point 1\1/2\ miles east of Pearson Field on the
extended centerline of Runway 8/26, and thence south to the north
shore of the Columbia River, thence west via the north shore of the
Columbia River to the 5-mile arc from Portland International Airport
and thence clockwise via the 5-mile arc to point of beginning. This
Class D airspace area is effective during the specific dates and
times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective
date and time will thereafter be continuously published in the
Airport/Facility Directory.
* * * * *
Issued in Seattle, Washington, on April 8, 1996.
Richard E. Prang,
Acting Assistant Manager, Air Traffic Division, Northwest Mountain
Region.
[FR Doc. 96-9992 Filed 4-22-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
