[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 219 (Wednesday, November 15, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 52826]
[FR Doc No: 2017-24742]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 21

[Docket No. FAA-2017-0851]

Airworthiness Criteria: Glider Design Criteria for DG Flugzeugbau
GmbH Model DG-1000M Glider

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Airworthiness design criteria.

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

SUMMARY: These airworthiness design criteria are for the DG Flugzeugbau
GmbH model DG-1000M glider. The Administrator finds the design
criteria, which make up the certification basis for the DG-1000M
glider, acceptable.

DATES: These airworthiness design criteria are effective December 15,
2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Jim Rutherford, AIR-692, Federal
Aviation Administration, Policy & Innovation Division, Small Airplane
Standards Branch, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, MO 64106,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, facsimile<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On May 18, 2011, DG Flugzeugbau GmbH submitted an application for
type validation of the DG-1000M glider in accordance with the Technical
Implementation Procedures for Airworthiness and Environmental
Certification Between the FAA and the European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA), dated May 05, 2011. This model is a variant of the DG-1000T
powered glider and will be added to existing Type Certificate No.
G20CE. The model DG-1000M is a two-seat, mid-wing, self-launching,
powered glider with a retractable engine and fixed-pitch propeller. It
is constructed from carbon and glass fiber reinforced plastic, and
features a conventional T-type tailplane. The glider also features a
65.6 foot (20 meter) wingspan and a maximum weight of 1,742 pounds (790
kilograms).
    The EASA type certificated the DG-1000M powered glider under Type
Certificate Number (No.) EASA.A.072 on March 17, 2011. The associated
EASA Type Certificate Data Sheet (TCDS) No. EASA.A.072 defines the DG
Flugzeubau GmbH certification basis submitted to the FAA for review and
acceptance.
    The applicable requirements for glider certification in the United
States can be found in FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 21.17-2A, ``Type
Certification--Fixed-Wing Gliders (Sailplanes), Including Powered
Gliders,'' dated February 10, 1993. AC 21.17-2A has been the basis for
certification of gliders and powered gliders in the United States for
many years. AC 21.17-2A states that applicants may utilize the Joint
Aviation Requirements (JAR)-22, ``Sailplanes and Powered Sailplanes,''
or another accepted airworthiness criteria, or a combination of both,
as the accepted means for showing compliance for glider type
certification.

Type Certification Basis

    The certification basis is based on JAR-22, amendment 6, dated
August 01, 2001. In addition to JAR-22 requirements, the applicant will
comply with other requirements from the certification basis referenced
in EASA TCDS No. EASA.A.072, including an equivalent safety finding.

Discussion of Comments

    Notice of proposed airworthiness design criteria for the DG
Flugzeugbau GmbH model DG-1000M glider was published in the Federal
Register on September 21, 2017 (82 FR 44126). No comments were
received; therefore, these airworthiness design criteria are adopted as
proposed.

The Proposed Design Criteria

    Applicable Airworthiness Criteria under Sec.  21.17(b).
    Based on the Special Class provisions of Sec.  21.17(b), the
following airworthiness requirements form the FAA Certification Basis
for this design:
    1. 14 CFR part 21, effective February 1, 1965, including amendments
21-1 through 21-92 as applicable.
    2. JAR-22, amendment 6, dated August 01, 2001.
    3. EASA Equivalent Safety Finding to JAR 22.207(c)--Stall warning.
(FAA issued corresponding Equivalent Level of Safety (ELOS) Memorandum
No. ACE-07-01A, dated April 02, 2012, as an extension to an existing
ELOS finding).
    4. ``Standards for Structural Substantiation of Sailplane and
Powered Sailplane Parts Consisting of Glass or Carbon Fiber Reinforced
Plastics,'' Luftfahrt-Bundesamt (LBA) document no. I4-FVK/91, issued
July 1991.
    5. ``Guideline for the analysis of the electrical system for
powered sailplanes,'' LBA document no. I334-MS 92, issued September 15,
1992.
    6. Operations allowed: VFR-Day, and ``Cloud Flying'' where ``Cloud
Flying'' is considered flying in Instrument Meteorological Conditions
(IMC) and requires an Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) clearance in the
United States. This is permissible provided the pilot has the
appropriate rating per 14 CFR 61.3, the glider contains the necessary
equipment specified under 14 CFR 91.205, and the pilot complies with
IFR requirements.
    7. EASA Type Certificate Data Sheet No. EASA.A.072, Issue 03, dated
March 17, 2011.
    8. Date of application for FAA Type Certificate: May 18, 2011.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on November 8, 2017.
Pat Mullen,
Manager, Small Airplane Standards Branch, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-24742 Filed 11-14-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 71 (Friday, April 14, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17989-17990]
[FR Doc No: 2017-07544]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG17-91-000.
    Applicants: Deerfield Wind, LLC.
    Description: Self-Certification of EWG Status of Deerfield Wind,
LLC.
    Filed Date: 4/7/17.
    Accession Number: 20170407-5103.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/28/17.

    Docket Numbers: EG17-92-000.
    Applicants: Tule Wind LLC.
    Description: Self-Certification of EWG Status of Tule Wind LLC.
    Filed Date: 4/7/17.
    Accession Number: 20170407-5106.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/28/17.

    Docket Numbers: EG17-93-000.
    Applicants: Twin Buttes Wind II LLC.
    Description: Self-Certification of EWG Status of Twin Buttes Wind
II LLC.
    Filed Date: 4/7/17.
    Accession Number: 20170407-5111.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/28/17.

    Docket Numbers: EG17-94-000.
    Applicants: El Cabo Wind LLC.
    Description: Self-Certification of EWG Status of El Cabo Wind LLC.
    Filed Date: 4/7/17.
    Accession Number: 20170407-5114.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/28/17.

    Docket Numbers: EG17-95-000.
    Applicants: Henderson County Solar LLC.
    Description: Self-Certification of EG or FC of Henderson County
Solar LLC.
    Filed Date: 4/7/17
    Accession Number: 20170407-5205.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/28/17.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER16-1760-001.
    Applicants: Armstrong Power, LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Informational Filing Regarding
Planned Transfer to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 4/6/17.
    Accession Number: 20170406-5231.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/27/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-1764-001.
    Applicants: Troy Energy, LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Informational Filing Regarding
Planned Transfer to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 4/6/17.
    Accession Number: 20170406-5232.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/27/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-1390-000.
    Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Engineering and Permitting
Agreement with California High Speed Rail (RS 247) to be effective 4/7/
2017.
    Filed Date: 4/6/17.
    Accession Number: 20170406-5512.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/27/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-1391-000.
    Applicants: Jersey Central Power & Light Company, Metropolitan
Edison Company, Pennsylvania Electric Company, Mid-Atlantic Interstate
Transmission, LLC, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Penelec, et al submits
Revised WASPs Service Agreement Nos. 4221, 4222, and 4223 to be
effective 6/6/2017.
    Filed Date: 4/7/17.
    Accession Number: 20170407-5053.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/28/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-1392-000.
    Applicants: El Cabo Wind LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Baseline new to be effective
6/6/2017.
    Filed Date: 4/7/17.
    Accession Number: 20170407-5054.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/28/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-1393-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2017-04-07_MISO 1st Quarter
2017 Tariff Clean-Up Filing to be effective 4/8/2017.
    Filed Date: 4/7/17.
    Accession Number: 20170407-5207.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/28/17.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: April 7, 2017.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-07544 Filed 4-13-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US

01/16/2008 09:17 AM

To

"King, Heidi R."<EMAIL_ADDRESS> cc

Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, "Johansson, Robert" <EMAIL_ADDRESS>Janet Cakir/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Subject

RE: Follow up to today on O3 RIA; Mtg time on Thu

Heidi

Your fingers must be tired after all these e-mails.   Hopefully you have a 3:00 meeting request on Thursday on your calendar to talk about baseline.   We are shooting for Friday to talk about the extrapolated cost with Art, time to be arranged (our first time did not work internally).   I will arrange a slot for the Energy EO for sometime next week, I have not caught up Lydia on this issue yet (I keep giving up my 1 on 1 slots to OMB meetings..............).  I have asked my staff to pull together the emissions data you requested, it should be available for the meeting on Thursday.

Ron

"King, Heidi R."<EMAIL_ADDRESS> 01/15/2008 06:07 PM

To

Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

cc

Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, "Johansson, Robert" <EMAIL_ADDRESS> Subject

RE: Follow up to today on O3 RIA; Mtg time on Thu

I promise this is my last email of the day:

Ron, we agreed I believe to set up an interagency conversation on the Energy Executive Order for Ozone NAAQS, and I wonder whether we can get that scheduled for next week as well.  At the very least to have the dialogue as a starting place.

Thanks, and good night,

heidi

From: King, Heidi R.

Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 6:00 PM

To<EMAIL_ADDRESS> Cc<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Johansson, Robert

Subject: RE: Follow up to today on O3 RIA; Mtg time on Thu

Also - who will be reaching out to set up time to brief Art on extrapolated costs?  Or should I reach out to someone?

Thank you; I don't mean to push, but rather to avoid losing the conversation thread while it is relatively fresh.

Best regards,

heidi

From: King, Heidi R.

Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 5:58 PM

To<EMAIL_ADDRESS> Cc<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Johansson, Robert

Subject: Follow up to today on O3 RIA; Mtg time on Thu

Ron and Lydia,

A couple of follow ups to today's conversation on Ozone NAAQS RIA:

- My apologies if I've missed an email, I believe we were going to set a time for a Thu conversation to continue today's discussion on the baseline issues.  Best time for OMB is something between 11am and 4pm; let me know if we should rearrange schedules to accomodate an earlier (or later) hour

- Could EPA please share the tons of NOx reduced (and % contribution) between base case and baseline in the draft final RIA broken out by

1) Bond Rule

2) Progress toward current NAAQS

3) Locomotive and Marine Rule

4) Aircraft (for sake of completeness)

5) Mobile (Tier 3, after-market catalyst, plug-in hybrids) - this is 169,000 tons, I understand

- Furthermore, could we get further detail on what is assumed as progress toward meeting the current NAAQS

Thank you;

heidi


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 210 (Monday, October 31, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67182-67184]
[FR Doc No: 2011-28077]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

EPA-HQ-OARM-2011-0803, EPA-HQ-OARM-2-11-0804; FRL-9484-8]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Background Checks for Contractor Employees (Renewal)
and Drug Testing for Contract Employees (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this document announces that EPA is planning to
submit a request to renew two existing

approved Information Collection Requests (ICR) to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB). These ICRs are scheduled to expire as
follows: EPA ICR No. 2159.03 on April 30, 2012, and EPA ICR No. 2183.05
on June 30, 2012. Before submitting the ICR to OMB for review and
approval, EPA is soliciting comments on specific aspects of the
proposed information collection as described below.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before December 30, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Numbers
provided for each item in the text, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
     Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Mail: OEI Docket, Environmental Protection Agency,
Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460.
Please include a total of three (3) copies and identify one of
following Docket ID Numbers:
    (1) Docket ID: EPA-HQ-OARM-2011-0803, Background Checks for
Contractor Employees.
    (2) Docket ID: EPA-HQ-OARM-2-11-0804, Drug Testing for Contractor
Employees.
     Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center-Attention OEI Docket, EPA
West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington DC 20004. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments identified by the Docket ID
numbers provided for each item in the text. EPA's policy is that all
comments received will be included in the public docket without change
and may be made available online at http://www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information provided, unless the comment
includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information
(CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through http://www.regulations.gov or email. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov your
email address will be automatically captured and included as part of
the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on
the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that
you include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional
information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Staci Ramrakha, Policy Training and
Oversight Division, Office of Acquisition Management (3802R),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

How can I access the docket and/or submit comments?

    EPA has established a public docket for each of the ICRs identified
in this document (see the Docket ID numbers for each ICR that are
provided in the text), which is available for online viewing at http://www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the OEI Docket in the EPA
Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave.,
NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room is open from 8:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the
telephone number for the OEI Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Use http://www.regulations.gov to obtain a copy of the draft
collection of information, submit or view public comments, access the
index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those
documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Once
in the system, select ``search,'' then key in the docket ID number
identified in this document.

What information is EPA particularly interested in?

    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA specifically
solicits comments and information to enable it to:
    (i) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency,
including whether the information will have practical utility;
    (ii) evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden
of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of
the methodology and assumptions used;
    (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
to be collected; and
    (iv) minimize the burden of the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses. In particular, EPA is requesting comments from
very small businesses (those that employ less than 25) on examples of
specific additional efforts that EPA could make to reduce the paperwork
burden for very small businesses affected by this collection.

What should I consider when I prepare my comments for EPA?

    You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your
comments:
    1. Explain your views as clearly as possible and provide specific
examples.
    2. Describe any assumptions that you used.
    3. Provide copies of any technical information and/or data you used
that support your views.
    4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you
arrived at the estimate that you provide.
    5. Offer alternative ways to improve the collection activity.
    6. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline identified
under DATES.
    7. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, be sure to identify the docket
ID number assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page
of your response. You may also provide the name, date, and Federal
Register citation.

What information collection activity or ICR does this apply to?

    An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal
Register when approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed
either by publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate
means, such as on the related collection instrument or form, if
applicable. The

display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is
consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.

Individual ICRs

    (1) Docket ID: EPA-HQ-OARM-2011-0803, Background Checks for
Contractor Employees;
    (2) Docket ID: EPA-HQ-OARM-2-11-0804, Drug Testing for Contractor
Employees.
    Affected entities: Entities potentially affected by these two ICRs
are contractors performing work at sensitive sites or on sensitive
projects, and not covered under the provisions of Homeland Security
Presidential Directive-2. Specifically, all contractors involved with
Emergency Response, Superfund, Information systems, Facility Services,
and Research Support that have significant security concerns, as
determined by the contracting officer, on a case-by-case basis, will be
required to provide qualified personnel that meet the background check
and drug testing requirements developed by EPA.

Titles: (1) Background Checks for Contractor Employees (Renewal); (2)
Drug Testing for Contractor Employees

    ICR numbers: (1) Background checks for Contractor Employees EPA-HQ-
OARM-2011-0803, OMB Control No. 2030-0043; (2) Drug Testing for
Contractor Employees EPA ICR No. 2183.05, OMB Control No. 2030-0044.
    ICR status: (1) EPA-HQ-OARM-2011-0803 is scheduled to expire on
April 30, 2012. (2) EPA ICR No. 2183.05 is scheduled to expire on June
30. 2012.
    Abstract: (1) Background checks cover citizenship or valid visa,
criminal convictions, weapons offenses, felony convictions, and parties
prohibited from receiving federal contracts. (2) Drug tests are for the
presence of marijuana, cocaine, opiates, amphetamines and phencyclidine
(PCP). Contractors shall maintain records of all background checks and
drug tests.
    Burden Statement: Burden means the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or
disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search
data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transmit or otherwise disclose the information. The individual ICRs
provide a detailed explanation of the Agency's estimate, which are
briefly summarized below.
    (1) The number of contractor employees expected to submit the
requested information for EPA-HQ-OARM-2011-0803, Background Checks, is
3,000 for the life of the ICR (3 years), which equates to 1,000 per
year. The estimated effort for contractors to collect information for
each background check is one hour, or 1,000 hours per year. The
estimated annual respondent cost for performing background check
collection requests is $83,450. This is calculated by multiplying the
number of annual occurrences, 1,000, by the estimated respondent cost
of $83.45 per collection, which includes time to fill out the
information, the cost of the background check, reviewing/applying
suitability criteria, submitting a notification to the EPA and
maintaining files. Using an annual escalation rate of 2.5%, this
equates to a total respondent cost of $256,670 over the three year life
of this ICR. In addition to the respondent burden, there is also an
agency burden for ensuring contractor compliance, documenting
contractors' notifications and issuing waivers. This is estimated to be
.5 hours for each collection (1,000 per year) and .25 hours for each
waiver request (250 per year) for a total of 562.5 hours per year and a
cost of $53,133.75 per year. This equates to a total agency cost of
$159,401.25 over the three year life of this ICR.
    (2) The number of contractor employees expected to submit the
requested information for EPA ICR No. 2183.05, Drug Testing, is 1,350
for the life of this ICR (3 years) which equates to 450 per year. The
estimated effort for contractors to collect information for each drug
test is one hour, for a total of 450 hours per year. The estimated
annual respondent cost for performing drug tests is $72,450. This is
calculated by multiplying the number of annual occurrences, 450, by the
estimated respondent cost of $161.00 per test, which includes time to
provide the sample, the cost of the drug test, reviewing results,
submitting notification to the EPA and maintaining files. Using an
annual escalation rate of 2.5%, this equates to a total respondent cost
of $495,000. In addition to the respondent burden, there is also an
agency burden for ensuring contractor compliance. This is estimated to
be .25 hours per occurrence for a total of 112.5 hours per year (450
drug tests per year multiplied by .25) and an annual cost of
$10,626.75. This equates to a total agency cost of $31,880.25 over the
three year life of this ICR.

Are there changes in the estimates from the last approval?

    EPA estimates that the hourly burden for both collections will
remain the same as reported in the previous information collections
because there has been no change in the information being collected and
approximately the same number of contracts remain active.

What is the next step in the process for this ICR?

    EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICRs as
appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for
review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. At that time, EPA will
issue another Federal Register notice pursuant to 5 CFR
1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the
opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB. If you have any
questions about this ICR or the approval process, please contact the
technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Dated: October 19, 2011.
John R. Bashista,
Director, Office of Acquisition Management.
[FR Doc. 2011-28077 Filed 10-28-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 160 (Friday, August 17, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 49712-49719]
[FR Doc No: 2012-19583]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2011-0438; Airspace Docket No. 11-AWA-4]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment to Class B Airspace; Salt Lake City, UT

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action modifies the Salt Lake City, UT, Class B airspace
to contain aircraft conducting Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) instrument
approach procedures to Salt Lake City International Airport (SLC), Salt
Lake City, UT. The FAA is taking this action to improve the flow of air
traffic, enhance safety, and reduce the potential for midair collision,
while accommodating the concerns of airspace users. Further, this
effort supports the FAA's national airspace redesign goal of optimizing
terminal and en route airspace to reduce aircraft delays and improve
system capacity. Minor corrections have been made to the geographic
coordinates of the affected legal descriptions, as well as editorial
corrections.

DATES: Effective Date: 0901 UTC, October 18, 2012. 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, Regulations,
and ATC Procedures Group, Office of Airspace Services, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On August 24, 2011, the FAA published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to modify the Salt Lake City, UT,
Class B airspace area (76 FR 52905). Interested parties were invited to
participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on
the proposal. Eight written comments were received in response to the
NPRM. All comments received were considered before making a
determination on the final rule.
    Class B airspace designations are published in paragraph 3000 of
FAA Order 7400.9V, dated August 9, 2011, and effective September 15,
2011, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class B
airspace designations listed in this document will be subsequently
published in the Order.

Discussion of Comments

    Four commenters opposed the vertical extension of the Salt Lake
City Class B airspace from 10,000 feet MSL to 12,000 feet MSL without
mitigating impacts on VFR operations. They challenged the operational
and safety benefit of raising the ceiling based on no actual mid-air
collision or conflict resolution data having been provided to support
taking this action.

    This Class B airspace area modification was initiated to ensure
containment of large turbine-powered aircraft within Class B airspace.
Raising the ceiling of the Salt Lake City Class B airspace to 12,000
feet MSL is necessary to contain the instrument procedures and
associated traffic patterns supporting those procedures at SLC. In
addition to the approximately 1,000 IFR operations a day operating at
and below 12,000 feet MSL within 30 miles of SLC, and the Ad hoc
Committee's endorsement of the 12,000 feet MSL ceiling, the raised
ceiling is based on operational necessity.
    Because SLC is situated in a valley with mountainous terrain to the
east and southeast, and southwest, there is only one traffic pattern
west of SLC, regardless of traffic flow. Departures from SLC must also
climb in the same airspace to the west of SLC before turning on course
to clear mountainous terrain. Departing aircraft climb to 10,000 feet
MSL to clear the terrain surrounding SLC and remain separated from
arrival aircraft established at or descending to the downwind traffic
pattern altitude of 11,000 feet MSL. Every arrival into SLC must enter
the downwind pattern west of the airport. During periods of high
traffic volume, or when incompatible aircraft are operating, air
traffic control must also use a 12,000-foot MSL downwind pattern
altitude to ensure aircraft separation. Raising the ceiling of the Salt
Lake City Class B airspace area around SLC to 12,000 feet MSL also
ensures airspace within which all aircraft, IFR and VFR, are subject to
the same Class B airspace operating rule; enhancing the safety benefit
to all and further reducing the potential for mid-air collisions in the
airspace surrounding SLC.
    To mitigate impacts on VFR aircraft operating between 10,000 feet
and 12,000 feet MSL, the FAA has developed high altitude VFR transition
routes, with associated frequencies, altitudes, and route depictions,
for inclusion on the Salt Lake City Terminal Area Chart, as discussed
further below. This charting was accomplished on April 5, 2012.
    One commenter argued against raising the Salt Lake City Class B
airspace area ceiling to 12,000 feet MSL, claiming it will have an
adverse impact on all general aviation operations in that airspace. The
commenter stated (1) the FAA was imposing a non-regulatory 14 CFR part
91.211, Supplemental oxygen, requirement on general aviation aircraft
to install supplemental oxygen systems to fly over the Class B
airspace; (2) air traffic controller approval/denial authority for VFR
clearances through Class B airspace creates an operational barrier to
VFR operations where none existed before; and (3) the FAA's only intent
is to provide increased operational and safety benefits to one segment
of air traffic--Part 121 operators.
    The FAA does not agree. First, the 14 CFR 91.211 regulation
referenced establishes the requirement for the minimum flight crew of
civil aircraft operating at cabin pressure altitudes above 12,500 feet
MSL up to and including 14,000 feet MSL to use supplemental oxygen for
that part of the flight at those altitudes that exceed thirty minutes.
Raising the Salt Lake City Class B airspace area ceiling to 12,000 feet
MSL still allows VFR aircraft to pass over the Class B airspace area at
12,500 feet MSL without requiring a supplemental oxygen system.
Aircraft with flight durations of thirty minutes or less flying over
the Salt Lake City Class B airspace area above 12,500 feet MSL up to
and including 14,000 feet MSL may also operate without a supplemental
oxygen system. For aircraft without supplemental oxygen systems that
are unable to fly over the Salt Lake City Class B airspace ceiling as
noted above, there are alternatives to installing a supplemental oxygen
system available for transiting the SLC area. Those alternatives
include obtaining a Class B clearance, flying established VFR
transition routes, and circumnavigating the Salt Lake City Class B
airspace area laterally or under the floor of the sub-areas.
    Second, the FAA acknowledges that Class B clearances will be
required for VFR aircraft that opt to continue flying VFR over SLC
between 10,000 feet and 12,000 feet MSL, and that Class B airspace
clearance requests from VFR aircraft are based on workload, operational
limitations, and traffic conditions. Using radar, the Salt Lake City
Terminal Radar Approach Control (TRACON) air traffic controllers have
visibility of all aircraft, IFR and VFR, operating in the vicinity of
SLC. Knowing the IFR traffic flows and the altitudes and intentions of
IFR and VFR aircraft operating in the vicinity of SLC, the TRACON
controllers are able to determine if clearance requests to enter or
transit the Class B airspace can be safely approved. For Class B
airspace clearance requests that can be approved, the TRACON
controllers will continue to issue clearances with altitude and routing
instructions to provide positive separation from all other aircraft,
IFR and VFR, operating within the Class B airspace.
    Lastly, this Class B airspace modification provides operational and
safety benefits to all airspace users operating in the vicinity of SLC.
The modified Class B airspace areas were designed to ensure all
instrument procedures and associated traffic patterns for those
procedures are contained within Class B airspace. However, a number of
adjustments to the Salt Lake City Class B airspace area were made
during the proposal process to ensure the airspace modification
supported all interested airspace users. Revising the surface area
boundary, amending floor altitudes of various sub-areas, charting high
altitude VFR transition routes, and modifying VFR flyways, as
suggested, are all examples of the efforts taken to ensure the final
Salt Lake City Class B airspace design provides operational and safety
benefits to all airspace users in the vicinity of SLC.
    Four commenters were concerned that raising the Salt Lake City
Class B airspace ceiling would result in a reduction of general
aviation aircraft that are able to transition above the Class B
airspace area and would force many general aviation pilots to fly at
lower altitudes under the Class B airspace shelves, resulting in
increased congestion in mountainous terrain, or circumnavigate the
Class B airspace area altogether, using less efficient routing at more
expense.
    The FAA understands the need for safe routes for VFR aircraft to
transition through, around, and under the Class B airspace. For VFR
aircraft that are unable to overfly the modified Class B airspace
ceiling (12,000 feet MSL), and decide not to contact Salt Lake City
TRACON to receive Class B services, there are a number of airspace
modifications made to the Class B airspace area to minimize impacts to
VFR pilots flying under the Class B airspace shelves or opting to
circumnavigate the Class B airspace altogether. The floor of Class B
airspace south of Point of the Mountain was raised from 9,000 feet MSL
to 10,000 feet MSL and the airspace west/northwest of the Point of the
Mountain was raised from 7,000 feet MSL to 8,000 feet MSL to allow
north- and south-bound VFR aircraft flying along I-15 and Point of the
Mountain to remain 1,000 feet higher, at all times, than the previous
Class B airspace allowed. The modified Salt Lake City Class B airspace
design also incorporated reductions to the northern and southern
boundaries of the Class B surface area to provide additional airspace
for east- and west-bound VFR aircraft to fly under the Class B airspace
area; thus reducing the

flying miles to be flown when compared to the previous Class B surface
area. The Class B airspace along the ridgeline of the Wasatch Mountains
was raised from the 9,000 feet MSL to 10,500 feet MSL to accommodate
glider operations and VFR aircraft crossing the ridgeline.
    Four commenters were concerned that general aviation pilots would
not have as many alternatives as possible to transit through, over, and
near the Salt Lake City Class B airspace. They requested the FAA
consider all available means of accommodating general aviation to
include an East-West VFR transit corridor, T-routes, VFR transitions,
and VFR flyways.
    Salt Lake City's traffic flows and pattern altitudes make
establishing a VFR corridor impractical. Salt Lake City has only one
downwind leg that passes west of the airport, and approximately 50
percent of Salt Lake City's departure traffic departs to the west/
northwest, climbing to 10,000 feet MSL to clear terrain. The only way
to allow a VFR aircraft to transit Salt Lake City Class B airspace at
or below 10,000 feet MSL would be to stop the departures. These
departures would conflict with any VFR corridor design that passed over
the airport.
    However, as recommended by the commenters and the Ad hoc Committee,
the FAA has published frequencies, altitudes, and VFR transition and
flyway routes on the Salt Lake City Terminal Area Chart to minimize the
Class B airspace modification impact to VFR aircraft. The published VFR
transition routes are established at 10,500 feet MSL for westbound
traffic and at 11,500 feet MSL for eastbound traffic. Additionally, the
VFR flyway amendment recommendations the FAA received have been
incorporated on the VFR Flyway Planning Chart, as provided and
addressed in the NPRM.
    One commenter expressed concern that VFR aircraft flying near and
above 12,000 feet MSL over Park City, UT, would conflict with IFR
aircraft from SLC as a result of the Salt Lake City Class B airspace
modification.
    The FAA notes that Park City, UT, is located approximately 22 miles
east southeast of SLC and approximately 19 miles east of the nearest
boundary of the Salt Lake City Class B airspace. An analysis of SLC
departure traffic indicates that aircraft departing for locations to
the east are above 12,000 feet MSL approximately 16 miles west
northwest of Park City and are not a factor for VFR aircraft over Park
City, at and above 12,000 feet MSL. The modification of the Salt Lake
City Class B airspace area was designed to contain existing instrument
procedures and large turbo-powered aircraft arriving/departing SLC. The
existing departure procedures, altitudes, and flight tracks for the
same fleet mix are unchanged by this Class B airspace modification.
Since the Salt Lake City TRACON will continue using the same departure
procedures, altitudes, and flight tracks in use today, no IFR-VFR
aircraft traffic issues over Park City, UT, are expected.
    One commenter stated it is virtually impossible to depart South
Valley Regional Airport (U42) in Instrument Meteorological Conditions
(IMC), or even marginal VFR conditions, on an IFR clearance due to
conflicts with the IFR traffic flow into and out of SLC. The commenter
requested the FAA address the issue by developing a viable IFR
departure procedure for U42 so that any minor modifications to the Salt
Lake City Class B modification could be incorporated into this
regulatory action.
    The delays associated with IFR operations at U42 are related to
terrain, the close proximity of SLC, and non-radar separation
requirements. The FAA's Flight Procedures Development Team was asked to
review the issue identified above and recommend any alternatives or
solutions that could be considered. Unfortunately, they could offer no
solution due to U42's geographic proximity to SLC with its associated
high density air traffic operations. Salt Lake City TRACON personnel
met with the U42 Fixed Base Operator (FBO) owner to discuss the U42
operation, ensure understanding of the limitations by all parties, and
reinforce the importance of coordinating IFR operations ahead of time
as the best way to address departure delays at U42.

Differences From the NPRM

    Editorial corrections have been made to the wording of the Salt
Lake City Class B airspace legal description to remove duplicative
information and excessive verbiage, simplify sub-area descriptions, and
improve clarity. These corrections standardize the format only and do
not affect the areas described.
    In the Salt Lake City Class B airspace legal description header,
the VORTAC listed as the ``Salt Lake City VORTAC (TCH)'' is corrected
to read the ``Wasatch VORTAC (TCH)''. The geographic coordinates
defining the VORTAC location were correct as published and remain
unchanged.
    Two typographical errors were also noted in the NPRM that affect
the descriptions of Areas F, G, and H. The first typographical error
listed the geographic coordinates for the southwest corner of Area F
and northwest corner of Area G as ``lat. 40[deg]30'55'' N., long.
112[deg]07'00'' W.'', and is corrected to read ``lat. 40[deg]30'33''
N., long. 112[deg]07'00'' W.'' in both area descriptions. The second
typographical error listed the geographic coordinates for the northwest
corner of Area H as ``lat. 40[deg]27'07'' N., long. 112[deg]07'00''
W.'', and is corrected to read ``lat. 40[deg]24'07'' N., long.
112[deg]07'00'' W.'' to match the geographic coordinate information for
the same point described in Area G.
    Additionally, this action makes a minor correction to the western
boundary of Area I to ensure a 0.5 NM buffer east of the extended RNAV
35 final approach. The Wasatch VORTAC (TCH) DME and geographic position
coordinates listed as ``24.1-mile DME'' and ``lat. 40[deg]27'05'' N.,
long. 111[deg]54'51'' W.'' that were used to define the northern point
of that boundary are corrected to read ``24.4-mile DME'' and ``lat.
40[deg]26'51'' N., long. 111[deg]54'42'' W.'' The corresponding
information for that point contained in Area G is also corrected. The
geographic position coordinates listed as ``lat. 40[deg]18'14'' N.,
long. 111[deg]53'40'' W.'' used to define the southern point of that
boundary are corrected to read ``lat. 40[deg]18'14'' N., long.
111[deg]53'42'' W.'' The corresponding information for that point
contained in Area H is also corrected. Lastly, the geographic position
coordinates listed as ``lat. 40[deg]24'12'' N., long. 111[deg]54'36''
W.'' used to define the southeast corner of Area G and northeast corner
of Area H, along the corrected western boundary of Area I, are
corrected to read ``lat. 40[deg]24'19'' N., long. 111[deg]54'23'' W.''
    Finally, this action makes a number of corrections to the
``seconds'' component of the lat./long. geographic coordinates to
better match this information with the corresponding visual landmark or
fix/radial/distance information for the associated point. These minor
editorial corrections do not change the affected areas.
    Radials listed in this rule are stated in degrees relative to True
North.

The Rule

    The FAA is amending Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14
CFR) part 71 to modify the Salt Lake City, UT, Class B airspace area.
This action (depicted on the attached chart) raises the existing
ceiling from 10,000 feet MSL to 12,000 feet MSL, and makes various
boundary modifications in order to provide the additional airspace that
is necessary to contain all instrument procedures at SLC and the large
turbo-powered aircraft flying those instrument procedures within the
confines of Class B airspace. The modifications better segregate IFR
aircraft arriving/departing SLC and VFR aircraft operating in the
vicinity of the Salt Lake Class B airspace

area. The following are the revisions to the Salt Lake City Class B
airspace area:
    Area A. Redefined from the surface to 12,000 feet MSL. The northern
boundary is moved south an average of 2 miles to allow VFR aircraft to
transition westbound sooner and relieve congestion between the Hill Air
Force Base (AFB) Class D airspace and Salt Lake City Class B surface
area airspace. The boundary north of the Skypark Airport (BTF) is moved
slightly to the west to relieve congestion between the Class B surface
area airspace and the Wasatch Mountains. The southern boundary surface
area airspace East of U42 is combined with the new Area D as noted
below.
    Area B. Incorporates portions of existing Areas B and J, and
establishes a floor at 7,800 feet MSL and ceiling at 12,000 feet MSL.
The western boundary changes from the SLC Runway 17 ILS/DME antenna (I-
BNT) 25-mile DME arc to the TCH 20-mile DME arc. Raising the floor
matches the existing Class B airspace area over Hill AFB and allows VFR
aircraft operating in the area to climb sooner.
    Area C. New area established by incorporating a portion of existing
Area A, raising the floor from the surface to 6,000 feet MSL and the
ceiling to 12,000 feet MSL, to reduce congestion between the Hill AFB
Class D airspace and the Salt Lake City Class B surface area airspace
to allow VFR aircraft easier access to transit north of SLC below the
Class B airspace area.
    Area D. Expands laterally into existing Class B airspace with the
ceiling raised to 12,000 feet MSL. Incorporates a portion of the
existing Area A located East of U42, raising the floor from the surface
to 6,000 feet MSL, to allow VFR aircraft easier access to and from U42.
    Area E. Combines existing Areas C and K with the floor established
at 6,500 feet MSL and the ceiling raised to 12,000 feet MSL. The
southern boundary is extended south slightly using the TCH 16-mile DME
arc. The southwest portion of the boundary is relocated east slightly
using the TCH 12-mile DME arc to eliminate terrain penetrations of
Class B airspace. The western boundary is defined by the TCH 13.5-mile
DME arc instead of the I-BNT 13-mile DME arc.
    Area F. New area established in existing Area E with the ceiling
raised to 12,000 feet MSL and the northern boundary defined by the TCH
16-mile DME arc instead of the I-BNT 11 DME arc. The southern boundary
is moved south slightly to contain runway 34L and 34R ILS approaches.
    Area G. Combines existing Areas F and G with the floor established
at 8,000 feet MSL and ceiling raised to 12,000 feet MSL. The southern
boundary is established approximately four miles south of the existing
Areas F and G southern boundary to allow IFR traffic during
simultaneous independent ILS approaches to join final closer to SLC.
    Area H. Similar to existing Area H, with the floor established at
9,000 feet MSL and ceiling raised to 12,000 feet MSL. Expanded slightly
to the west to use the same longitude for its boundary as the new Area
G and redefines the southern boundary further north by using the TCH
33-mile DME arc.
    Area I. New area established east of area H with the floor
established at 10,000 feet MSL and ceiling at 12,000 feet MSL. Designed
to capture arrival traffic from the southeast.
    Area J. New area established over the north end of the Oquirrh
Mountains with the floor established at 11,000 feet MSL and ceiling at
12,000 feet MSL. This area contains IFR departure traffic climbing
southbound, as well as arrival traffic being vectored to the downwind.
    Area K. New area established redefining a portion of existing Area
B with the floor raised to 8,600 feet MSL and ceiling to 12,000 feet
MSL. Provides additional airspace for VFR aircraft.
    Area L. Redefines a portion of existing Area I (northern section)
with the floor raised to 10,500 feet MSL and ceiling to 12,000 feet
MSL. Allows north-flow departures from SLC to climb and turn eastbound
on course. The eastern boundary of this new area is moved to the west
along the Wasatch Mountains ridgeline. The southern section of existing
Area I is deleted.
    Area M. Similar to existing Area M with the floor at 9,000 feet MSL
and ceiling raised to 12,000 feet MSL. The lateral boundaries extend
slightly with the northern boundary extended north to the TCH 26-mile
DME arc and the western boundary extended west approximately one mile.
    Area N. New area established north of the existing Salt Lake City
Class B airspace area with the floor at 10,000 feet MSL and ceiling at
12,000 feet MSL. Contains aircraft flying instrument approaches to SLC
runway 17.
    Area O. New area established in existing Class B airspace north and
east of SLC with the floor at 7,500 feet MSL and ceiling raised to
12,000 feet MSL. Provides containment of aircraft flying instrument
approaches to SLC runway 16R and 16L.

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 and Executive Order 13563 direct
that each Federal agency shall propose or adopt a regulation only upon
a reasoned determination that the benefits of the intended regulation
justify its costs. Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub.
L. 96-354) requires agencies to analyze the economic impact of
regulatory changes on small entities. Third, the Trade Agreements Act
(Pub. L. 96-39) prohibits agencies from setting standards that create
unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. In
developing U.S. standards, the Trade Act requires agencies to consider
international standards and, where appropriate, that they be the basis
of U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Pub. L. 104-4) requires agencies to prepare a written assessment of
the costs, benefits, and other effects of proposed or final rules that
include a Federal mandate likely to result in the expenditure by State,
local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private
sector, of $100 million or more annually (adjusted for inflation with
base year of 1995). This portion of the preamble summarizes the FAA's
analysis of the economic impacts of this final rule.
    Department of Transportation Order DOT 2100.5 prescribes policies
and procedures for simplification, analysis, and review of regulations.
If the expected cost impact is so minimal that a proposed or final rule
does not warrant a full evaluation, this order permits that a statement
to that effect and the basis for it to be included in the preamble if a
full regulatory evaluation of the cost and benefits is not prepared.
Such a determination has been made for

this final rule. The reasoning for this determination follows:
    After consultation with a diverse cross-section of stakeholders
that participated in the Ad hoc Committee to develop the
recommendations contained in this rule, and a review of the
recommendations and comments, the FAA expects that this final rule
would result in minimal cost. The FAA is taking this action to improve
the flow of air traffic, enhance safety, and reduce the potential for
midair collision in the Salt Lake City Class B airspace.
    The FAA received comments to the NPRM that indicated concern with
the rule from an economic standpoint. Commenters such as the Aircraft
Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) expressed the concern that an
increase to the ceiling height of Salt Lake City Class B airspace will
result in general aviation pilots taking less efficient routing to
circumnavigate the Class B airspace. The Experimental Aircraft
Association (EAA) fears that general aviation operators who are unable
to comply with the supplemental oxygen requirement or unable to obtain
air traffic control clearance to fly visual flight rules (VFR) into the
Class B will be forced to fly thousands of miles around the Salt Lake
City Class B airspace in mountainous terrain. The result would be to
cost general aviation aircraft operators thousands of dollars in
unanticipated aircraft operating expenses and place the aircraft and
passengers over hostile, mountainous terrain for extended periods of
time.
    The FAA has restructured the airspace to allow sufficient
alternatives to circumnavigation for VFR traffic. The restructuring and
other FAA actions include the following:
     Raising Class B airspace floors south of and west/
northwest of the Point of the Mountain 1,000 feet to allow north- and
south-bound VFR aircraft flying along I-15 more airspace to fly under
the SLC Class B airspace area;
     Reducing Class B surface area northern and southern
boundaries to provide more airspace for east- and west-bound VFR
aircraft to fly under the Class B airspace area;
     Raising Class B airspace floor along the Wasatch Mountains
ridgeline 1,500 feet to provide more airspace for VFR aircraft crossing
the ridgeline;
     Establishing and charting high altitude VFR transition
routes at 10,500 feet MSL for westbound traffic and at 11,500 feet MSL
for eastbound traffic, with associated frequencies, on the Salt Lake
City Terminal Area Charts; and
     Adopting VFR flyway amendment recommendations received
from the Ad hoc Committee and NPRM commenters.

The FAA provided numerous alternatives for GA traffic to fly in the
Salt Lake City airspace. As such, we estimate a minimal impact.
    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.

Regulatory Flexibility Determination

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) (RFA)
establishes ``as a principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall
endeavor, consistent with the objectives of the rule and of applicable
statutes, to fit regulatory and informational requirements to the scale
of the businesses, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions
subject to regulation.'' To achieve this principle, agencies are
required to solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to
explain the rationale for their actions to assure that such proposals
are given serious consideration.'' The RFA covers a wide-range of small
entities, including small businesses, not-for-profit organizations, and
small governmental jurisdictions.
    Agencies must perform a review to determine whether a rule will
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. If the agency determines that it will, the agency must
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis as described in the RFA.
However, if an agency determines that a rule is not expected to have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities,
section 605(b) of the RFA provides that the head of the agency may so
certify and a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required. The
certification must include a statement providing the factual basis for
this determination, and the reasoning should be clear.
    The FAA believes the rule would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities as the economic impact
is expected to be minimal.
    Therefore, the FAA Administrator certifies that this final rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.

International Trade Impact Assessment

    The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39), as amended by the
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. L. 103-465), prohibits Federal
agencies from establishing standards or engaging in related activities
that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United
States. Pursuant to these Acts, the establishment of standards is not
considered an unnecessary obstacle to the foreign commerce of the
United States, so long as the standard has a legitimate domestic
objective, such as the protection of safety, and does not operate in a
manner that excludes imports that meet this objective. The statute also
requires consideration of international standards and, where
appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. standards. The FAA has
assessed the potential 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).

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

0
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]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9V, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 9, 2011, and effective September 15,
2011, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 3000 Subpart B--Class B Airspace.

* * * * *

ANM UT B Salt Lake City, UT [Modified]

Salt Lake City International Airport (Primary Airport)
    (Lat. 40[deg]47'18'' N., long. 111[deg]58'40'' W.)
Wasatch VORTAC (TCH)
    (Lat. 40[deg]51'01'' N., long. 111[deg]58'55'' W.)
Hill AFB (HIF)
    (Lat. 41[deg]07'26'' N., long. 111[deg]58'23'' W.)

Boundaries

    Area A. That area extending upward from the surface to and
including 12,000 MSL, within an area bounded by a line beginning at
the TCH 20[deg] radial 6.6-mile DME at lat. 40[deg]57'13'' N., long.
111[deg]55'56'' W.; thence south to the intersection of Redwood Rd.
and W. 500 South St. at the TCH 049[deg] radial 3.1-mile DME at lat.
40[deg]53'02'' N., long. 111[deg]55'48'' W.; thence south to Center
St. at the TCH 102[deg] radial 2.3-mile DME at lat. 40[deg]50'32''
N., long. 111[deg]55'57'' W.; thence east along Center St. to
Interstate 15 (I-15) at the 4.3-mile DME radius of the Salt Lake
City International Airport at the TCH 099[deg] radial 3-mile DME at
lat. 40[deg]50'32'' N., long. 111[deg]54'56'' W.; thence clockwise
along the 4.3-mile DME radius of the Salt Lake City International
Airport to I-15 at the TCH 151[deg] radial 7.3-mile DME at lat.
40[deg]44'37'' N., long. 111[deg]54'15'' W.; thence south along I-15
to W. 5300 South St. at the TCH 163[deg] radial 12.3-mile DME at
lat. 40[deg]39'17'' N., long. 111[deg]54'06'' W.; thence west to the
Usana Amphitheatre at the TCH 192[deg] radial 11.8-mile DME at lat.
40[deg]39'28'' N., long. 112[deg]02'08'' W.; thence northwest to the
intersection of State Route 201 (SR-201) and S. 8000 West St. at the
TCH 210[deg] radial 9.1-mile DME at lat. 40[deg]43'06'' N., long.
112[deg]04'56'' W.; thence northwest to Interstate 80 (I-80) at the
TCH 239[deg] radial 9-mile DME at lat. 40[deg]46'22'' N., long.
112[deg]09'04'' W.; thence north to a point southeast of Seagull
Point on Antelope Island at the TCH 304[deg] radial 9.3-mile DME at
lat. 40[deg]56'13'' N., long. 112[deg]09'05'' W.; thence east to the
point of beginning.
    Area B. That airspace extending upward from 7,800 feet MSL to
and including 12,000 feet MSL, within an area bounded by a line
beginning at the TCH 265[deg] radial 12-mile DME at lat.
40[deg]49'57'' N., long 112[deg]14'40'' W.; thence west along the
TCH 265[deg] radial to the 20-mile DME arc at lat. 40[deg]49'13''
N., long. 112[deg]25'09'' W.; thence clockwise along the TCH 20-mile
DME arc to the 4.3-mile DME radius of Hill AFB at the TCH 009[deg]
radial at lat. 41[deg]10'47'' N., long. 111[deg]54'48'' W.; thence
clockwise along the 4.3-mile DME radius of Hill AFB to W. 1700 South
St. at the TCH 347[deg] radial 14.7-mile DME at lat. 41[deg]05'20''
N., long. 112[deg]03'21'' W.; thence west along W. 1700 South St. to
the TCH 329[deg] radial 16.8-mile DME at lat. 41[deg]05'22'' N.,
long. 112[deg]10'20'' W.; thence south to the TCH 316[deg] radial
11.6-mile DME at lat. 40[deg]59'21'' N., long. 112[deg]09'33'' W.;
thence south to a point southeast of Seagull Point on Antelope
Island at the TCH 304[deg] radial 9.3-mile DME at lat.
40[deg]56'13'' N., long. 112[deg]09'05'' W.; thence southwest to the
point of beginning.
    Area C. That airspace extending upward from 6,000 feet MSL to
and including 12,000 feet MSL, within an area bounded by a line
beginning at the TCH 316[deg] radial 11.6-mile DME at lat.
40[deg]59'21'' N., long. 112[deg]09'33'' W.; thence east to I-15 at
the TCH 013[deg] radial 9.8-mile DME at lat. 41[deg]00'34'' N.,
long. 111[deg]56'00'' W.; thence south to the TCH 020[deg] radial
6.6-mile DME at lat. 40[deg]57'13'' N., long. 111[deg]55'56'' W.;
thence west to a point southeast of Seagull Point on Antelope Island
at the TCH 304[deg] radial 9.3-mile DME at lat. 40[deg]56'13'' N.,
long. 112[deg]09'05'' W.; thence north to the point of beginning.
    Area D. That airspace extending upward from 6,000 feet MSL to
and including 12,000 feet MSL, within an area bounded by a line
beginning at the Usana Amphitheatre at the TCH 192[deg] radial 11.8-
mile DME at lat. 40[deg]39'28'' N., long. 112[deg]02'08'' W.; thence
east to the intersection of I-15 and W. 5300 South St. at the TCH
163[deg] radial 12.3-mile DME at lat. 40[deg]39'17'' N., long.
111[deg]54'06'' W.; thence south along I-15 to the TCH 169[deg]
radial 20.7-mile DME at lat. 40[deg]30'43'' N., long.
111[deg]53'31'' W.; thence west to the TCH 184[deg] radial 20.4-mile
DME at lat. 40[deg]30'38'' N., long. 112[deg]00'33'' W.; thence
north to the TCH 184[deg] radial 16-mile DME at lat. 40[deg]35'03''
N., long. 112[deg]00'23'' W.; thence clockwise along the TCH 16-mile
DME arc to State Route 48 (SR-48) at the TCH 189[deg] radial at lat.
40[deg]35'13'' N., long. 112[deg]02'18'' W.; thence north to the
point of beginning.
    Area E. That airspace extending upward from 6,500 feet MSL to
and including 12,000 feet MSL, within an area bounded by a line
beginning on SR-48 at the TCH 189[deg] radial 16-mile DME arc at
lat. 40[deg]35'13'' N., long. 112[deg]02'18'' W.; thence clockwise
along the TCH 16-mile DME arc to the TCH 203[deg] radial at lat.
40[deg]36'14'' N., long. 112[deg]07'00'' W.; thence north along
long. 112[deg]07'00'' W. to the TCH 211[deg] radial 12-mile DME at
lat. 40[deg]40'42'' N., long. 112[deg]07'00'' W.; thence clockwise
along the TCH 12-mile DME arc to the railroad tracks at the TCH
233[deg] radial at lat. 40[deg]43'43'' N., long. 112[deg]11'27'' W.;
thence west along the railroad tracks to the TCH 236[deg] radial
13.5-mile DME at lat. 40[deg]43'27'' N., long. 112[deg]13'38'' W.;
thence clockwise along the TCH 13.5-mile DME arc to the TCH 265[deg]
radial at lat. 40[deg]49'49'' N., long. 112[deg]16'38'' W.; thence
east along the TCH 265[deg] radial to the TCH 12-mile DME at lat.
40[deg]49'57'' N., long. 112[deg]14'40'' W.; thence northeast to a
point southeast of Seagull Point on Antelope Island at the TCH
304[deg] radial 9.3-mile DME at lat. 40[deg]56'13'' N., long.
112[deg]09'05'' W.; thence south to I-80 at the TCH 239[deg] radial
9-mile DME at lat. 40[deg]46'22'' N., long. 112[deg]09'04'' W.;
thence southeast to the intersection of SR-201 and S. 8000 West St.
at the TCH 210[deg] radial 9.1-mile DME at lat. 40[deg]43'06'' N.,
long. 112[deg]04'56'' W.; thence southeast to the Usana Amphitheatre
at the TCH 192[deg] radial 11.8-mile DME at lat. 40[deg]39'28'' N.,
long. 112[deg]02'08'' W.; thence south to the point of beginning.
    Area F. That airspace extending upward from 7,000 feet MSL to
and including 12,000 feet MSL, within an area bounded by a line
beginning at the TCH 184[deg] radial 16-mile DME at lat.
40[deg]35'03'' N., long. 112[deg]00'23'' W.; thence clockwise along
the TCH 16-mile DME arc to the TCH 203[deg] radial at lat.
40[deg]36'14'' N., long. 112[deg]07'00'' W.; thence south along
long. 112[deg]07'00'' W. to the TCH 197[deg] radial 21.4-mile DME at
lat. 40[deg]30'33'' N., long. 112[deg]07'00'' W.; thence east to the
TCH 184[deg] radial 20.4-mile DME at lat. 40[deg]30'38'' N., long.
112[deg]00'33'' W.; thence north to the point of beginning.
    Area G. That airspace extending upward from 8,000 feet MSL to
and including 12,000 feet MSL, within an area bounded by a line
beginning on I-15 at the TCH 169[deg] radial 20.7-mile DME at lat.
40[deg]30'43'' N., long. 111[deg]53'31'' W.; thence south along I-15
to the TCH 172[deg] radial 24.4-mile DME at lat. 40[deg]26'51'' N.,
long. 111[deg]54'42'' W.; thence south along the TCH 173[deg] radial
to the TCH 26.9-mile DME at lat. 40[deg]24'19'' N., long.
111[deg]54'23'' W.; thence west to the TCH 193[deg] radial 27.6-mile
DME at lat. 40[deg]24'07'' N., long. 112[deg]07'00'' W.; thence
north along long. 112[deg]07'00'' W. to the TCH 197[deg] radial
21.4-mile DME at lat. 40[deg]30'33'' N., long. 112[deg]07'00'' W.;
thence east to the point of beginning. Excluding R-6412, when
active.
    Area H. That airspace extending upward from 9,000 feet MSL to
and including 12,000 feet MSL, within an area bounded by a line
beginning at the TCH 193[deg] radial 27.6-mile DME at lat.
40[deg]24'07'' N., long. 112[deg]07'00'' W.; thence south along
long. 112[deg]07'00'' W. to the TCH 191[deg] radial 33-mile DME at
lat. 40[deg]18'34'' N., long. 112[deg]07'00'' W.; thence counter
clockwise along the TCH 33-mile DME arc to the TCH 173[deg] radial
at lat. 40[deg]18'14'' N., long. 111[deg]53'42'' W.; thence north
along the TCH 173[deg] radial to the TCH 26.9-mile DME at lat.
40[deg]24'19'' N., long. 111[deg]54'23'' W.; thence west to the
point of beginning. Excluding R-6412, when active.
    Area I. That airspace extending upward from 10,000 feet MSL to
and including 12,000 feet MSL, within an area bounded by a line
beginning on I-15 at the TCH 172[deg] radial 24.4-mile DME at lat.
40[deg]26'51'' N., long. 111[deg]54'42'' W.; thence south along I-15
to intercept the TCH 160[deg] radial 33-mile DME at lat.
40[deg]19'54'' N., long. 111[deg]44'26'' W.; thence clockwise along
the TCH 33-mile DME arc to the TCH 173[deg] radial at lat.
40[deg]18'14'' N., long. 111[deg]53'42'' W.; thence north along the
TCH 173[deg] radial to the point of beginning.
    Area J. That airspace extending upward from 11,000 feet MSL to
and including 12,000 feet MSL, within an area bounded by a line
beginning on the railroad tracks at the TCH 238[deg] radial 20-mile
DME at lat. 40[deg]40'22'' N., long. 112[deg]21'12'' W.; thence east
along the railroad tracks to the TCH 233[deg] radial 12-mile DME at
lat. 40[deg]43'43'' N., long. 112[deg]11'27'' W.; thence counter
clockwise along the TCH 12-mile DME arc to the TCH 211[deg] radial
at lat. 40[deg]40'42'' N., long. 112[deg]07'00'' W.; thence south
along long. 112[deg]07'00'' W. to the TCH 198[deg] radial 20-mile
DME at lat. 40[deg]31'58'' N., long. 112[deg]07'00'' W.; thence
clockwise along the TCH 20-mile DME arc to the point of beginning.
    Area K. That airspace extending upward from 8,600 feet MSL to
and including 12,000 feet MSL, within an area bounded by a line
beginning at the TCH 265[deg] radial 13.5-mile DME at lat.
40[deg]49'49'' N., long. 112[deg]16'38'' W.; thence west along the
TCH 265[deg] radial to intercept the TCH 20-mile DME arc at lat.
40[deg]49'13'' N., long. 112[deg]25'09'' W.; thence counter
clockwise along the TCH 20-mile DME arc to the railroad tracks at
the TCH

238[deg] radial at lat. 40[deg]40'22'' N., long. 112[deg]21'12'' W.;
thence east along the railroad tracks to the TCH 236[deg] radial
13.5-mile DME at lat. 40[deg]43'27'' N., long. 112[deg]13'38'' W.;
thence clockwise along the TCH 13.5-mile DME arc to the point of
beginning.
    Area L. That airspace extending upward from 10,500 feet MSL to
and including 12,000 feet MSL, within an area bounded by a line
beginning at the intersection of the Wasatch Mountains ridge line
and Interstate 84 (I-84) at the TCH 016[deg] radial 18-mile DME at
lat. 41[deg]08'17'' N., long. 111[deg]52'18'' W.; thence west along
I-84 to the 4.3-mile radius of Hill AFB at the TCH 015[deg] radial
17.9-mile DME at lat. 41[deg]08'16'' N., long. 111[deg]52'48'' W.;
thence clockwise along the 4.3-mile radius of Hill AFB to U.S.
Highway 89 at the TCH 014[deg] radial 13.6-mile DME at lat.
41[deg]04'11'' N., long. 111[deg]54'39'' W.; thence south along U.S.
Highway 89 to I-15 at the TCH 024[deg] radial 9-mile DME at lat.
40[deg]59'14'' N., long. 111[deg]54'05'' W.; thence south along I-15
to the TCH 072[deg] radial 4-mile DME at lat. 40[deg]52'16'' N.,
long. 111[deg]53'50'' W.; thence east along lat. 40[deg]52'16'' N.
to the TCH 081[deg] radial 8-mile DME at lat. 40[deg]52'16'' N.,
long. 111[deg]48'30'' W.; thence north along long. 111[deg]48'30''
W. to the Wasatch Mountains ridge line at the TCH 059[deg] radial
9.2-mile DME at lat. 40[deg]55'45'' N., long. 111[deg]48'30'' W.;
thence north along the Wasatch Mountains ridge line to the point of
beginning.
    Area M. That airspace extending upward from 9,000 feet MSL to
and including 12,000 feet MSL, within an area bounded by a line
beginning on I-15 at the TCH 356[deg] radial 26-mile DME at lat.
41[deg]16'57'' N., long. 112[deg]01'33'' W.; thence counter
clockwise along the TCH 26-mile DME arc to the TCH 338[deg] radial
at lat. 41[deg]15'07'' N., long. 112[deg]11'50'' W.; thence south to
the TCH 333[deg] radial 20-mile DME at lat. 41[deg]08'50'' N., long.
112[deg]10'56'' W.; thence clockwise along the TCH 20-mile DME arc
to I-15 at the TCH 356[deg] radial at lat. 41[deg]10'58'' N., long.
112[deg]00'49'' W.; thence north along I-15 to the point of
beginning.
    Area N. That airspace extending upward from 10,000 feet MSL to
and including 12,000 feet MSL, within an area bounded by a line
beginning on I-15 at the TCH 356[deg] radial 26-mile DME at lat.
41[deg]16'57'' N., long. 112[deg]01'33'' W.; thence clockwise along
the TCH 26-mile DME arc to North Mountain Rd. at the TCH 003[deg]
radial at lat. 41[deg]16'59'' N., long. 111[deg]56'57'' W.; thence
south on North Mountain Rd., which turns into Harrison Blvd., to the
TCH 004[deg] radial 20-mile DME at lat. 41[deg]10'58'' N., long.
111[deg]56'56'' W.; thence counter clockwise along the TCH 20-mile
DME arc to I-15 at the TCH 356[deg] radial at lat. 41[deg]10'58''
N., long. 112[deg]00'49'' W.; thence north along I-15 to the point
of beginning.
    Area O. That airspace extending upward from 7,500 feet MSL to
and including 12,000 feet MSL, within an area bounded by a line
beginning at the intersection of U.S. Highway 89 and a 4.3-mile
radius from Hill AFB at the TCH 014[deg] radial 13.6-mile DME at
lat. 41[deg]04'11'' N., long. 111[deg]54'39'' W.; thence clockwise
along the 4.3-mile radius from Hill AFB to 1700 South St. at the TCH
347[deg] radial 14.7-mile DME at lat. 41[deg]05'20'' N., long.
112[deg]03'21'' W.; thence west along W. 1700 South St. to the TCH
329[deg] radial 16.8-mile DME at lat. 41[deg]05'22'' N., long.
112[deg]10'20'' W.; thence south to the TCH 316[deg] radial 11.6-
mile DME at lat. 40[deg]59'21'' N., long. 112[deg]09'33'' W.; thence
east to I-15 at the TCH 013[deg] radial 9.8-mile DME at lat.
41[deg]00'34'' N., long. 111[deg]56'00'' W.; thence south to the TCH
020[deg] radial 6.6-mile DME at lat. 40[deg]57'13'' N., long.
111[deg]55'56'' W.; thence south to the intersection of Redwood Rd.
and W. 500 South St. at the TCH 049[deg] radial 3.1-mile DME at lat.
40[deg]53'02'' N., long. 111[deg]55'48'' W.; thence south to Center
St. at the TCH 102[deg] radial 2.3-mile DME at lat. 40[deg]50'32''
N., long. 111[deg]55'57'' W.; thence east along Center St. to I-15
at the TCH 099[deg] radial 3-mile DME at lat. 40[deg]50'32'' N.,
long. 111[deg]54'56'' W.; thence north along I-15 to U.S. Highway 89
at the TCH 024[deg] radial 9-mile DME at lat. 40[deg]59'14'' N.,
long. 111[deg]54'05'' W.; thence north along U.S. Highway 89 to the
point of beginning.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 2, 2012.
Gary A. Norek,
Manager, Airspace Policy and ATC Procedures Group.
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR17AU12.002

[FR Doc. 2012-19583 Filed 8-16-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-C