Federal Aviation Administration SUA Process Overview FAA JO 7400.2 Clark Desing, Manager, Operations Support Group Western Service Center Pacific Aviation.

Federal AviationAdministration

SUA ProcessOverview

FAA JO 7400.2

Clark Desing, Manager, Operations Support GroupWestern Service CenterPacific Aviation Directors WorkshopMay 2009

2 2Federal AviationAdministration PADW May 2009

Airspace: Pre-ActionConsiderations (Proponent)

• Use of existing area• Modification or sub-division of areas• Shared-use• Avoid airways/jet routes, major terminal areas, and high

volume VFR routes• Define your requirements


Airspace: Defining Requirements(Proponent)

• List Activities (who, what)– Number and type aircraft– Types of activities/mission– Altitudes– Type weapons– Chart of firing points, impact areas, firing fans and

safety buffers• Chart of proposed location (where, why)• Days/times of use (when)


Two Processes Work in ConcertFAA 7400.2, Appendix 4

SUA/ATCAA Conceptual Design

Aeronautical Impact

Environmental Impact

* Category Exclusions (CATX)

* Environmental Assessment (EA)

* Environmental Impact Study (EIS)

* Informal Coordination Process

* Formal Aeronautical Proposal

* Aeronautical Study

* Final Determination

Must Match at the End


Airspace: Pre-coordination DoD/FAA Informal Coordination Process

• Mandatory• Most important step in the process• Who

– Proponent with the affected ATC facility• Proponent presents a draft airspace concept with

requirements• Is it operationally feasible?


Airspace: Feasibility ReviewInformal Coordination Process

• Done by ATC facility, Assistance provided by an OSG ATREP

• Determines feasibility• Evaluates potential impact on facility operations• Looks for ways to reduce affect to the NAS• Expect changes• Review can be lengthy• Helps prepare the formal proposal• Not to be considered as FAA endorsement or approval


Submission of Formal Aeronautical Proposal and Environmental

Formal Process Stage Begins

• Proponent sends airspace proposal to FAA Service Center (Operations Support Group) through the appropriate Military Representative.– Version found to be feasible by ATC facility

• Include all requirements listed in FAAO 7400.2 para. 21-3-3– Include ATCAA’s– Include environmental analysis if complete


Environmental Documentation(Proponent and OSG)

• Assess the airspace found to be feasible by ATC facility.

• Assessment must meet FAA requirements (Cooperating Agency Agreement)

• Contact the OSG Environmental Specialist for FAA process and requirements prior to submitting airspace proposal

• Don’t let Environmental Impact Statement or Assessment get too far ahead of airspace proposal

• Environmental and aeronautical process must end concurrently


9

Initial Service Area Action (OSG)

• Aeronautical Study (*)• User Groups• Informal Airspace Meetings• Rule/Non-Rule Making Process• Public Comments

(*) Formal Overview of Feasibility


10

Aeronautical Study Content (ATC Facility/OSG)

• What affect would this new airspace have on:– IFR and VFR Terminal Operations – Impact on public use and charted private airports (airports

with FAA Form 5010 on file) – Impact on IFR En Route Operations – Impact on VFR Operations, Routes, and Flyways− Impact on other pending proposals. Cumulative

Aeronautical Impact− Associated ATCAA− Alternatives − ATC Facility Assessment − ATC services − Recommendation (s) for FAA action on the proposal


Aeronautical Study Findings (OSG)

• The service area office will:– Coordinate the study findings with the proponent to

explore possible options to reduce aeronautical impact


12

User Groups (OSG)

• Comprised of varied aviation interests such as:− Airlines, general and business aviation, airports, etc

• Proposal may be submitted to a user group for technical assistance– WSC OSG requirement

• Should be presented jointly by FAA and proponent• User groups provide FAA and proponent with other

user perspectives• Can be effective in helping identify potential problems

not already discovered or considered


Informal Airspace Meetings (All)

“It is the policy of the FAA to hold, if at all practicable, informal airspace meetings to inform the affected users of planned airspace changes. The purpose is to gather facts and information relevant to the planned rulemaking or non-rulemaking action being studied. These are held in advance of the rulemaking/non-rulemaking action.”


14

Rulemaking (OSG and HQ)

• Rulemaking:– Changes Federal Law by prohibiting or restricting

public access – Process for regulatory SUA (Restricted and

Prohibited areas)– FAA notice to public that FAA is considering

Regulatory airspace action– Gather pubic comments– Process has no provision for waivers or “shortcuts”


Non-Rulemaking (OSG and HQ)

• Non-rulemaking– Process for non-regulatory SUA (Warning

Area/MOA/CFA/Alert): – FAA notice to public that FAA is considering Non-

Regulatory airspace action– Gather public comments


16

Public Comments (All)

• Who can comment– Anybody; not restricted to only users of the NAS


Final Service Area Actions (OSG)

• Safety Risk Management Document• Business Case• Service Area Concurrence/Recommendation• Environmental Documentation (Final) • Final package to FAA Airspace and Rules


Final Environmental Documentation (OSG and Proponent)

• Proponent matches final environmental document with proposed airspace parameters.– Times of use, lateral and vertical dimensions, types

and numbers of operations, supersonic flight, etc.• Proponent signs, EA/FONSI or EIS/ROD and submits

to Service Center • Service Center reviews for compliance stated above• Service Area Environmental Specialist prepares final

draft FAA determinations


Final Package Contents (OSG)

• Service Area:1. Legal description2. Graphic depiction, sectional3. Proponents airspace proposal4. Aeronautical comments with resolution5. Proponents final environmental document6. Synopsis of FAA environmental issues (draft)7. Aeronautical study8. Summary of minutes informal airspace meetings9. Summary of user group meetings10. SRMD11. Business Case12. Inter-agency memo’s, FS, Airports, ATC facilities13. Director’s recommendations/endorsement


FAA Headquarters Action

• Warning/Danger Area Proposal to State Department• Airspace Office reviews, forwards draft final rule or non-

rule to Environmental Office with supporting documents • Environmental Office prepares and forwards final FAA

FONSI/ROD to Chief Counsel• Chief Counsel completes sufficiency review and sends

comments back to Environmental Office• Environmental Office signs decision document and

forwards back to Airspace Office


FAA HQ Action

• Airspace Office makes final airspace determination– Publishes Final Rule, Non-Rule, charts action– Letter of Rejection

• Then begins the process of implementing the change to the National Airspace System (NAS), if appropriate.


Summary

• Maximize existing SUA (shared use)• Define requirements and outline environmental issues• * ATC facility feasibility review (Informal Coordination)• * Submit formal airspace proposal and environ. analysis • * Aeronautical impact• * Public and user group comments• * SRMD and Business Case• * Final proposal and matching environmental documents• * FAA HQ final review, approval, charting or disapproval• Implementation, if appropriate• Typically 3-5 years to completion

(*) Potential for change exists

Federal Aviation Administration SUA Process Overview FAA JO 7400.2 Clark Desing, Manager, Operations Support Group Western Service Center Pacific Aviation.

Documents

airspace proposaldont

new airspace

airspace proposalenvironmental

aeronautical process

environmental impact

impact areas

faa process

environmental impact