Section 6. Processing of Airport Proposals By
Service Area Offices
11-6-1. EFFECT ON AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL OPERATIONS
The air
traffic office must conduct an airspace review to evaluate the
effect on the safe and efficient utilization of airspace by aircraft
and the effect that such proposals may have on the movement and
control of air traffic, associated resources (personnel, facilities
and equipment), and ATC program planning.
a. The
depth of the review must commensurate with the location, complexity,
and timing of the proposed development. The range of the study may
vary from no need to review (e.g., the closing of an airport
reported for record purposes) to a large effort required to process
and study a proposal for a new major air carrier airport to serve a
high density terminal area.
b. An
airspace review must be conducted for activation, deactivation or
alteration of any landing area, reported in compliance with part 157
or an airport owner's federal obligations, for military construction
projects, and at any other time deemed necessary for assessing the
utilization of airspace. Include studies associated with existing
airports and with disposal or conveyance of Federal property for
public airport purposes, as appropriate.
c. Upon
completion of the airspace review, forward the response (via the OE/AAA
automation program, electronic mail, or memorandum) to the
responsible Airports Office. The airspace response must recommend
approval or disapproval of the use of the airspace associated with
the proposal. This response must be in the form of no objection
without conditions, no objection provided certain conditions are
met, or objectionable. If the recommendation of the finding to the
proposed use of the associated airspace is objectionable or to
disapprove the proposal, clearly state the reasons why. If the
finding is conditional, also clearly state the conditions. Care must
be exercised when issuing conditional findings. When the conditions
are such that a substantial adverse effect would result if not
corrected (such as the blocked view to a portion of the movement
area from the airport traffic control tower), then an objectionable
or disapproval finding should be recommended. Include a statement
that the FAA will reconsider the proposal after provisions are made
to resolve the objectionable conditions.
11-6-2. COORDINATION
The reviewing
air traffic office must coordinate airport proposals with other air
traffic offices and facilities as appropriate.
a. Projects
contemplated at airports served by an ATCT or flight service station
must be coordinated with the facility manager or his/her
representative prior to arriving at a finding. Documentation of the
coordination performed must be entered in the case file. The ATCT
responds on the proposal to the service area office in accordance
with local procedures.
b. Military
Airport Proposals which are not part of the Military Construction
Program (MCP) are normally submitted to service area offices through
the regional military representatives. Those proposals must be
processed in the same manner as civil proposals except that the air
traffic office is responsible for coordinating the proposals with
the Airports, Flight Standards, and technical operations services
offices. The air traffic office is also responsible for any
coordination necessary with the military regarding the proposal and
issuance of the regional determination.
c. The
Airports Office will coordinate and negotiate with the airport
owner/sponsor to resolve problems with proposals on civil, public
use airports. The Airports Office may request the air traffic office
to assist in the negotiation if the problem relates to the safe and
efficient utilization of the airspace.
11-6-3. AIRPORT TRAFFIC PATTERNS
a. If
the appropriate VFR or IFR traffic pattern airspace area
requirements overlap or if airspace requirements cannot be developed
to accommodate the category and volume of aircraft anticipated at an
existing or planned airport, the airport, in all cases, need not be
found objectionable from an airspace utilization standpoint if
adjustments to traffic patterns (such as establishing non-standard
traffic patterns, assigning specific traffic pattern altitudes,
and/or developing special operational procedures) would mitigate the
conflict. Such action may reduce the capacity, operational
flexibility, and compatibility of the airports involved. The air
traffic office must determine if airspace areas overlap. If the
airport proposal's traffic pattern conflicts with the pattern of an
adjacent airport and the conflict could be eliminated by adjusting
only the proposal's pattern, the air traffic office will specify the
traffic pattern to be used as a condition of the proposal's
determination.
b. If an adjacent traffic pattern needs to
be adjusted to solve a conflict and the pattern adjustment can be
made safely, the Airports Office will request assistance from the
air traffic office in negotiating with the adjacent airport
owner/manager for agreement in writing to the traffic pattern
adjustment. If a non-standard traffic pattern adjustment is made at
a public-use airport with other than a full-time control tower, then
visual indicators at the airport are required, in accordance with AC
150/5340-5, Segmented Circle Airport Marker System. If night
operations are conducted or planned at the airport, then
floodlighting of the segmented circle is necessary.
c. The
traffic pattern airspace associated with an airport proposal may not
overlap the traffic pattern of an adjacent airport.
11-6-4. PART
77 REVIEW
Review
proposed structures and existing terrain or objects that exceed part
77 obstruction standards to determine the extent of adverse effect
and recommend marking/lighting if needed. If the review indicates
obstructions that are potential hazards to the airport proposal,
forward the airspace finding to the Airports Office. The airspace
use associated with a new airport or airport alteration proposal
should normally be considered as objectionable (or disapproved for
AIP) if the study discloses an adverse effect that cannot be
mitigated.
11-6-5. DESIGNATION OF INSTRUMENT RUNWAY/CHANGE IN AIRPORT STATUS
VFR TO IFR
The
processing required by air traffic offices depends upon the action
necessary for establishment of the instrument approach procedure.
This can involve the establishment of NAVAIDs, nonrule or rulemaking
circularization and associated actions, the need for communications,
weather reporting, and the capability of providing air traffic
control service. In conducting the airspace review, determine the
viability of establishing a reasonable instrument approach procedure
and the acceptability of the airport environment for the proposed
procedure. Also, evaluate the effect of the proposed procedure on
existing or proposed IFR or VFR aeronautical operations at the
airport in question and/or adjacent airports. Be particularly alert
to previously issued “no objection" determinations which include a
provision/condition for VFR only operations. Forward the finding to
the responsible office. Airports must coordinate and circularize all
VFR to IFR changes for all part 157 proposals and airport layout
plans (see paragraph 11-2-9).
11-6-6. ONSITE EVALUATION
The need for
onsite evaluations will be determined by the airspace review
results. Onsite evaluations may be especially necessary when the
review indicates the presence of unsafe conditions. The air traffic
office should assist the Airports, Flight Standards, and FPTs in the
onsite evaluation, as appropriate.
NOTE-
Noise consideration, see paragraph
11-1-6.
|
