Amendment of Class D and Establishment of Class E Airspace; Chandler and Phoenix, AZ

Issuing agencies

Abstract

This action amends the Class D airspace and establishes Class E airspace at Chandler and Phoenix, AZ. This action is the result of biennial airspace reviews pursuant to FAA Order JO 7400.2R, Procedures for Handling Airspace Matters. The name and geographic coordinates of the Mesa Gateway Airport, Phoenix, AZ, are also being updated to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database. This action brings the airspace into compliance with FAA orders and supports instrument flight rule (IFR) procedures and operations.

Full Text

<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 209 (Friday, October 30, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 209 (Friday, October 30, 2026)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 68449-68453]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-22197]



[[Page 68449]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2025-5571; Airspace Docket No. 25-AWP-172]
RIN 2120-AA66


Amendment of Class D and Establishment of Class E Airspace; 
Chandler and Phoenix, AZ

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends the Class D airspace and establishes Class 
E airspace at Chandler and Phoenix, AZ. This action is the result of 
biennial airspace reviews pursuant to FAA Order JO 7400.2R, Procedures 
for Handling Airspace Matters. The name and geographic coordinates of 
the Mesa Gateway Airport, Phoenix, AZ, are also being updated to 
coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database. This action brings the 
airspace into compliance with FAA orders and supports instrument flight 
rule (IFR) procedures and operations.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, February 18, 2027. 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 JO 7400.11 
and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: A copy of the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), all 
comments received, this final rule, and all background material may be 
viewed online at <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a> using the FAA Docket number. 
Electronic retrieval help and guidelines are available on the website. 
It is available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. An electronic 
copy of this document may also be downloaded from 
<a href="http://www.federalregister.gov">www.federalregister.gov</a>.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11M, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, 
and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at <a href="http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/">www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/</a>. You may also contact the Rules and 
Regulations Group, Office of Policy, Federal Aviation Administration, 
800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Claypool, Federal Aviation 
Administration, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101 
Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone (817) 222-5711.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is 
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, 
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's 
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described 
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, 
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of 
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient 
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority 
as it amends the Class D airspace and establishes Class E airspace at 
the affected airports to support IFR operations.

History

    The FAA published an NPRM for Docket No. FAA-2025-5571 in the 
Federal Register (90 FR 59081; December 18, 2025) proposing to amend 
the Class D airspace and establish Class E airspace at Chandler and 
Phoenix, AZ. Interested parties were invited to participate in this 
rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the 
FAA. The FAA appreciates the public's participation in the rulemaking 
process. Ninety-six comments were received and all comments have been 
reviewed and considered. The following responses are provided.
    The airspace requirements for airports with public instrument 
procedures and air traffic control towers (ATCT) are outlined in FAA 
Order JO 7400.2R and 14 CFR part 71, Designation of Class A, B, C, D, 
and E Airspace Areas; Air Traffic Service Routes; and Reporting Points. 
The FAA only designates controlled airspace required under FAA orders 
and 14 CFR part 71 and makes every effort to respect and protect the 
public's right of transit.
    A majority of the airports within the Phoenix area have not 
received a complete airspace review in 25 years or longer. During that 
timeframe, instrument procedures and FAA orders and regulations 
governing airspace requirements have changed, thus requiring the 
airspace modification to bring the airspace into compliance with FAA 
orders and regulations and to support IFR operations. The changes to 
FAA orders and regulations require the modification and expansion of 
the controlled airspace at Chandler Municipal Airport and Mesa Gateway 
Airport.
    Two comments expressed general dissatisfaction with the proposal 
without identifying any specific aspects to which they object or making 
any recommendations on how to revise the proposal. Due to the lack of 
specificity, the FAA is unable to provide a detailed response but 
acknowledges the general objections.
    Fifty-nine comments raised concerns regarding the impact the 
proposed airspace modifications would have on VFR operations within the 
Phoenix area. The majority of these comments did not provide 
recommendations for how to revise the proposal or recommended either 
leaving the current airspace in place or reducing the current 
controlled airspace. All of these 59 comments expressed dissatisfaction 
with raising the vertical limits of the Chandler, AZ Class D airspace 
from 3,000 feet MSL to 3,700 feet MSL and the possible safety 
implications of leaving only 300 feet between the top of the Chandler, 
AZ, Class D airspace and the bottom of the Phoenix, AZ, Class B 
airspace. A comment from the Arizona Pilots Association objects to the 
lateral increase in the Chandler Municipal Airport Class D airspace, 
which ``would close the distance'' between that Class D airspace and 
the Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport Class B airspace, further 
constraining and concentrating VFR traffic.
    The proposed modification to the vertical limit was derived from 
FAA Order JO 7400.2R, paragraph 17-2-8 which states that ``Class D 
areas should normally extend upward from the surface up to and 
including 2,500 feet AGL.'' As such, reducing the vertical limit from 
what was proposed is not consistent with the referenced FAA order. In 
response to the safety concern expressed in the comments, the vertical 
limit of the Class D airspace at Chandler, AZ, is being raised from 
3,000 feet MSL to up to but excluding 4,000 feet MSL rather than 3,700 
feet MSL as initially proposed. This change eliminates the possibility 
of VFR traffic attempting to transit through the 300-foot area between 
the Chandler, AZ, Class D and the Phoenix, AZ, Class B airspace. 
Aircraft will still be able to transit the same area but will need to 
contact Chandler FAA Contract Tower (FCT) for clearance. The FAA 
believes that positive control of aircraft transiting this area is in 
the best interest of safety and will eliminate the risk of midair 
collisions expressed in the comments.
    Twenty-five comments stated concerns regarding the impact of the 
proposed airspace changes on Pegasus Airpark. The following is the 
categorization of the comments: 6

[[Page 68450]]

expressed dissatisfaction without providing recommendations for 
modifying the proposal; 18 recommended increasing the exclusion area 
from the proposed 1.2-mile radius to a 1.5-mile radius; 5 recommended 
an exclusion area that matches or is smaller than the one proposed; 1 
suggested increasing the exclusion area from a 1.2-mile radius to a 
1.8-mile radius; 1 suggested increasing the exclusion area from a 1.2-
mile radius to a 2-mile radius; and 2 suggested increasing the 
exclusion area from a 1.2-mile radius to a 3-mile radius.
    The FAA acknowledges the comments expressing general 
dissatisfaction but is unable to respond further to comments lacking 
specificity or a recommendation for modifying the proposal. The 
suggestions to increase the exclusion area cited an increase in high-
performance aircraft operating at Pegasus Airpark that need more 
uninhibited airspace to remain clear of the Mesa Gateway Airport, 
Phoenix, AZ, Class D airspace. The proposed exclusion area is equal to 
the airspace area currently outside of the Mesa Gateway Airport, 
Phoenix, AZ Class D airspace. Therefore, it does not shrink the 
airspace available for these operations.
    Pursuant to Advisory Circular (AC) 90-66C, Non-Towered Airport 
Flight Operations, it is the responsibility of the airport owners and 
operators to coordinate the establishment of nonstandard traffic 
patterns with the FAA. The airport owner is then responsible for 
publishing the traffic pattern information in the Chart Supplement. The 
operator of the Pegasus Airpark has not accomplished this, so a 
standard traffic pattern is assumed and the appropriate Class G 
airspace provided. The air traffic manager (ATM) at Mesa Gateway 
Airport was asked to consider an increase in the exclusion area. 
However, as there have not been any incursions into the Class D 
airspace in the area of Pegasus Airpark; Pegasus Airpark has not made 
any coordination request to accommodate a larger air traffic pattern; 
and the proposed exclusion area is equal to the area currently outside 
of the Mesa Gateway Airport Class D airspace, the ATM does not believe 
that an increase in the exclusion area is needed at this time. If the 
situation changes and the proper coordination is complete, the issue of 
expanding the exclusion area may be revisited.
    Twenty-eight comments objected to the potential impact of the 
proposed airspace changes on Stellar Airpark. The following is the 
categorization of the comments: 19 expressed dissatisfaction without 
providing recommendations for how to modify the proposal; 5 recommended 
an exclusion area that matched the proposal; and 1 comment stated the 
Stellar Airpark is not a VFR airport. The FAA is unable to respond to 
the comments expressing general dissatisfaction without details or 
providing any recommendations as it is impossible to address them 
without specifics.
    Many comments cited an increase in high-performance aircraft 
operating at Stellar Airpark that needed more Class G airspace to 
remain clear of the Chandler Municipal Airport, Chandler, AZ Class D 
airspace. One comment objected to the airspace changes because they 
would allegedly frustrate the ability of VFR pilots to continue using 
the same visual landmarks for navigation. And one comment expressed 
concern with the impact on a privately funded instrument approach 
procedure at Stellar Airpark. The proposed exclusion area provides for 
a standard cutout for VFR airports and accommodates the public 
instrument procedures into Stellar Airpark.
    As previously stated, pursuant to AC 90-66C, it is the 
responsibility of the airport owners and operators to coordinate the 
establishment of nonstandard traffic patterns with the FAA. The airport 
owner is then responsible for publishing the traffic pattern 
information in the Chart Supplement. The Stellar Airpark operator has 
not accomplished this, and there is no information regarding traffic 
patterns in the Stellar Airpark Chart Supplement entry, so a standard 
traffic pattern is assumed and the appropriate Class G airspace 
provided. If the situation changes and the proper coordination is 
complete, the issue of expanding the exclusion area may be revisited.
    The FAA also confirms Stellar Airpark's status as a VFR airport. 
While Stellar Airpark does have instrument procedures--which were 
considered in the development of Chandler, AZ Class D exclusion area--
that does not make Stellar Airpark an IFR or controlled airport. 
Stellar Airpark is an uncontrolled airport, and operators are required 
to take off and land following visual flight rules, thus Stellar 
Airpark is an uncontrolled, VFR airport.
    Seventeen comments stated that the proposed airspace changes would 
increase the workload of pilots and would increase air traffic 
controller workloads beyond the capabilities of the affected air 
traffic facilities [i.e., Chandler Municipal Airport FCT, Mesa Gateway 
Airport FCT, and Phoenix TRACON (P50)]. The ATMs from Chandler 
Municipal Airport FCT and Mesa Gateway Airport FCT, and management from 
P50 and the Albuquerque Air Traffic Services District participated in 
the planning of the airspace changes. These ATMs understand the added 
responsibilities the airspace changes will have on the air traffic 
controllers and have complete confidence that these facilities are 
capable of handling the responsibilities. Regarding the increased 
workload on the pilots, the airspace changes are required by and 
consistent with FAA orders and regulations.
    Six comments alleged that there was no coordination with airspace 
stakeholders, including the ATMs at Chandler Municipal Airport FCT, 
Mesa Gateway Airport FCT, Falcon Field Air Traffic Control Tower 
(ATCT), P50, or the airport managers at Pegasus Airpark and Stellar 
Airpark, and that the assigned airspace specialist was not familiar 
enough with the Phoenix airspace to understand the impacts of the 
proposed changes. The ATMs from Chandler Municipal Airport FCT and Mesa 
Gateway Airport FCT requested the biennial airspace reviews of their 
respective airspaces. These ATMs and the P50 Airspace Manager 
participated in numerous meetings regarding these amendments and the 
proposal to ensure that the local conditions were taken into 
consideration and adjustments were made in accordance with their 
recommendations and consistent with FAA orders and regulations. The ATM 
from Falcon Field was not included in these efforts as the airspace is 
outside of that ATM's geographic area of responsibility. Coordination 
for Class D and Class E airspace involves the air traffic facility 
providing control to the affected area. The FAA obtains input from 
other stakeholders through the rulemaking comment period, which 
occurred. The personnel assigned to this effort have the requisite 
training and experience with the FAA orders and regulations regarding 
airspace and applicable requirements.
    One comment questioned whether a safety risk management assessment 
was completed for this proposal. The standards codified in FAA Order JO 
7400.2R, including all amendments, receive a safety risk management 
assessment. Accordingly, compliance with FAA Order JO 7400.2R when 
making changes to the National Airspace System satisfies the FAA and 
ICAO requirements for safety risk management. All changes comply with 
FAA Order JO 7400.2R.
    One comment from Hughes Aerospace Corporation opined that the 
proposed Class E airspace extending upward from

[[Page 68451]]

700 feet above the surface at Stellar Airpark is insufficient and 
requested a review of the proposed Class E airspace. All data submitted 
by the commenter was reviewed; however, the official data from the FAA 
databases showed higher values than those submitted by the commenter. 
Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface must 
be designated to accommodate arriving IFR operations below 1,500 feet 
above the surface and departing IFR operations from 700 feet above the 
surface until they reach 1,200 feet above the surface. The data used 
for these computations are contained within FAA Form 8260-9, Part D, 
Airspace.
    The commenter's concern is that the initial approach fix, JEWLZ, 
and holding pattern for the RNAV (GPS) RWY 35 would not be contained in 
the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface. 
The altitude requirement for JEWLZ is no lower than 3,000 MSL (mean sea 
level), equivalent to 1,821 feet AGL (above ground level), which places 
JEWLZ in the existing Class E airspace extending upward from 1,200 feet 
above the surface. The holding pattern for RNAV (GPS) RWY 35 is 
restricted to an altitude no higher than 4,000 feet MSL (2,821 AGL) and 
no lower than 3,000 feet MSL (1,821 AGL), so the entire holding pattern 
is within the existing Class E airspace extending upward from 1,200 
feet above the surface.
    The FAA reviewed the RNAV (GPS) RWY 35 into Stellar Airpark, as 
requested, and determined that the instrument approach procedure is 
contained in the appropriate airspace pursuant to FAA Order JO 7400.2R, 
and the proposed Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above 
the surface for Stellar Airpark is sufficient and correct.
    One comment questioned the need to increase the Class D airspace 
associated with Mesa Gateway Airport. FAA Order JO 7400.2R requires 
that Class D airspace is of adequate dimensions to: (a) allow an 
aircraft departing the airport at a standard rate of climb to reach the 
adjoining airspace while maintaining a 700 feet AGL clearance from the 
terrain in the area; and (b) protect the instrument approach procedures 
below 1,000 feet AGL and any departure procedure until the aircraft 
reaches the next adjoining airspace. In this case, the adjoining 
airspace for both (a) and (b) is the Class E airspace extending upward 
from 700 feet above the surface. The Class D airspace at 5.4 miles 
meets all requirements outlined in FAA Order JO 7400.2R.
    One comment stated, ``Now normally, a busy Class B area one would 
request Flight Following--however the FAA policy of the PHX Tracon has 
been to not grant these VFR FF requests.'' The commenter did not 
provide or cite evidentiary support for this claim. It is FAA policy 
that flight following services are provided upon request as allowed by 
the air traffic controller workload. The P50 ATM and the General 
Manager for the Albuquerque Air Traffic Services District were 
contacted regarding this comment, and their response is, ``flight 
following is and will continue to be granted to all pilots, upon 
request and workload.''
    One comment stated that the proposed airspace change would create 
an overlap between the current Falcon Field, Mesa, AZ, Class D airspace 
and the proposed Mesa Gateway Airport, Phoenix, AZ, Class D airspace. 
The FAA reviewed the airspace and confirmed there is no overlap. Other 
comments objected to the elimination of the existing corridor of Class 
G airspace between the Class D airspace associated with Falcon Field 
and Mesa Gateway Airport. However, as described earlier, the expansion 
of the Mesa Gateway Airport Class D airspace is required for compliance 
with FAA Order JO 7400.2R.
    One comment stated that it would be helpful to have a graphical 
depiction of the proposed airspace. Pursuant to FAA Order JO 7400.2R, 
graphical depictions are only required for Class B and Class C airspace 
proposals. Moreover, providing graphical depictions of every Class D 
airspace proposal is not feasible considering the high volume of Class 
D airspace amendments throughout the National Airspace System.
    One comment from Brandon Esquer, a member of the P50 National Air 
Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA), stated that the expansion of 
the Chandler Municipal Airport Class D airspace is unnecessary and not 
in compliance with FAA orders. This commenter asserted that the 
existing IFR transitional airspace is adequate. The commenter's 
interpretation of the FAA orders and requirements is correct but 
incomplete. The commenter cited a requirement to protect departures to 
the lateral limits of the Class D airspace and into the transitional 
Class E airspace, which is correct. More specifically, the complete 
requirement for Class D airspace contained in FAA Order JO 7400.2R is 
that the airspace is sufficiently sized to: (a) allow an aircraft 
departing the airport at a standard rate of climb to reach the 
adjoining airspace while maintaining a 700 feet AGL clearance from the 
terrain in the area; and (b) protect the instrument approach procedures 
below 1,000 feet AGL and any departure procedures until the aircraft 
reaches the next adjoining airspace. In this case, the adjoining 
airspace for both (a) and (b) is the Class E airspace extending upward 
from 700 feet above the surface.
    In the case of Chandler Municipal Airport, aircraft are unable to 
maintain a 700 feet AGL clearance above terrain in the Class D surface 
area within the current 4-mile radius and reach the Class E airspace 
extending upward from 700 feet above the surface. Additionally, the 
departure procedure for runways 04L and 04R at Chandler Municipal 
Airport is a climbing left hand turn to heading 220[deg] to intercept 
the Stanfield VORTAC 350[deg] radial, then southbound to the Stanfield 
VORTAC. Prior to this final rule, in the Chandler Municipal Airport 
Class D airspace aircraft would exit the Chandler Municipal Airport 
Class D airspace, enter the Mesa Gateway Airport Class D airspace, and 
re-enter the Chandler Municipal Airport Class D airspace before finally 
exiting the Chandler Municipal Airport Class D airspace at 3,000 feet 
MSL directly into a VFR flyway. With the airspace modified by this 
final rule, aircraft can maintain the required 700 feet AGL terrain 
clearance within the Class D surface area, and an aircraft on the 
departure procedure for runways 04L 04R can turn back into the Class D 
airspace upon reaching the 4.8-mile Class D airspace boundary and 
exiting the Class D airspace when reaching 4,000 feet MSL.
    Furthermore, FAA Order JO 7400.2R requires that departure 
procedures within the Class D airspace maintain 700 feet AGL clearance 
of terrain and include airspace 1.8 NM either side of the track to be 
flown. The requirement within Class E airspace extending upward from 
700 feet above the surface is to provide airspace 1.8 NM either side of 
the track to be flown. For Class E airspace extending upward from 1,200 
feet above the surface, the requirement is to provide airspace 4 NM 
either side of the track to be flown. The expansion of the Chandler 
Municipal Airport Class D airspace to 4.8 miles meets all the 
requirements for Class D airspace contained in FAA Order JO 7400.2R, 
using the Mesa Gateway Airport Class D airspace to protect the eastern 
area of the departure procedure without requiring additional airspace.
    Additionally, raising the vertical limit of the Class D airspace up 
to but excluding 4,000 feet MSL further protects the IFR aircraft on 
the departure procedure and reduces the risk of a midair collision with 
aircraft

[[Page 68452]]

operating VFR. The FAA appreciates the comment from this NATCA member; 
however, his interpretation of FAA orders is incomplete. The expansion 
of the Chandler Municipal Airport Class D airspace is needed to bring 
the airspace into compliance with FAA orders and regulations and will 
enhance safety of aircraft operating IFR from Chandler Municipal 
Airport by reducing the possibility of midair collisions.
    Lastly, a comment from the Mesa Gateway Airport Authority (MGAA) 
cited five concerns: (1) the proposal does not take into account the 
volume of training and general aviation operations in the area; (2) the 
proposed airspace changes for the Mesa Gateway Airport Class D airspace 
will reduce the arrival and departure capacity and create bottlenecks, 
forcing complex procedures that will increase taxiing, runway 
crossings, and create delays; (3) the proposed airspace changes will 
adversely impact the VFR flyway and VFR traffic; (4) the proposal 
constitutes an isolated rulemaking that is not harmonized with the 
Phoenix Area Modernization Plan (PAMP); and (5) the proposal will have 
an adverse economic impact on Mesa Gateway Airport. The FAA provides 
the following responses.
    The FAA acknowledges MGAA's concerns about impacts to other 
operations in the area, including the VFR flyway. The FAA only 
designates controlled airspace as required under FAA orders and 14 CFR 
part 71 and makes every effort to respect and protect the public's 
right of transit. However, the changes are required to bring the 
airspace into compliance with FAA orders and regulations and to support 
IFR operations in the Phoenix area.
    The FAA also acknowledges MGAA's concerns that the proposed 
airspace changes will reduce the arrival and departure capacity at the 
Mesa Gateway Airport. The FAA designed the airspace for Mesa Gateway 
Airport based on the current instrument procedures, bringing the 
airspace into compliance with current FAA orders and regulations. There 
are no new instrument procedures in development, and the airspace 
change does not require new, complex procedures to be developed or 
implemented at Mesa Gateway Airport. The expansion of the airspace 
allows aircraft to maintain 700 feet AGL clearance from the terrain 
required by FAA Order JO 7400.2R. Additionally, the FAA does not agree 
that expanding the Class D airspace will create ground delays predicted 
by MGAA (e.g., air traffic bottleneck, increased taxi times, increased 
runway crossing requirements, air traffic delays, etc.) as the airspace 
change accommodates existing procedures and operations at the airport 
and does not change or impact taxi procedures.
    The FAA also acknowledges the ongoing work of the PAMP. The review 
and amendment of the Mesa Gateway Airport Class D airspace was 
requested by Mesa Gateway Airport FCT ATM. The Director of Operations 
for the Central Service Area Air Traffic Services was aware of the 
pending airspace amendment and has monitored the progress and possible 
impact of the PAMP. Additionally, the FAA is not bypassing any 
environmental process. Modification of Class D airspace requires an 
independent environmental review, which has been completed and is 
summarized in the Environmental Review section of this action.
    Lastly, the FAA declines to alter the proposal based on the claim 
that the airspace changes will have an adverse economic impact on Mesa 
Gateway Airport. The FAA does not have statutory authority to consider 
economic factors as part of its airspace designations. Further, the 
comment from MGAA did not explain how the expansion of the Class D 
airspace at Mesa Gateway Airport would result in adverse economic 
impacts, instead providing only a general explanation of how Mesa 
Gateway Airport contributes to the economy of the area. The airspace 
change expands the Class D airspace to support the existing instrument 
procedures. It does not add or change any instrument procedures or 
otherwise directly impact operations at Mesa Gateway Airport.

Differences From the NPRM

    Subsequent to publication of the NPRM, a typographical error was 
discovered in the NPRM. In the Chandler, AZ, Class D airspace legal 
description, ``latitude'' was used instead of ``longitude.'' Correction 
of this typographic error does not change the boundaries of the 
airspace as they currently exist or as proposed or impose any 
additional requirements on users of the airspace. Accordingly, the FAA 
finds good cause that recirculating this action for public comment is 
unnecessary.
    In response to the comments received on the NPRM and in the 
interest of safety, the vertical limit of the Chandler, AZ, Class D 
airspace is being raised from the current limit of 3,000 feet MSL up to 
but excluding 4,000 feet MSL rather than 3,700 feet MSL as proposed in 
the NPRM. This will close the gap between the expanded Class D airspace 
and the overlying Class B airspace, reducing hazards to Class B 
operations and preventing VFR pilots from attempting to navigate 
through the narrow gap without communicating with air traffic control. 
The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) authorizes agencies to dispense 
with ordinary notice and comment requirements for rules when the agency 
for ``good cause'' finds that those procedures are ``impracticable, 
unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.'' 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). 
This change is made in response to a valid safety concern raised by the 
numerous comments received on the NPRM. The FAA finds good cause that 
recirculating this action for public comment is unnecessary, as the 
change directly responds to dozens of comments already received.

Incorporation by Reference

    Class D and E airspace designations are published in paragraphs 
5000 and 6005 of FAA Order JO 7400.11, Airspace Designations and 
Reporting Points, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 on 
an annual basis. This document amends the current version of that 
order, FAA Order JO 7400.11M, dated July 30, 2026, and effective 
September 15, 2026. These amendments will be published in the next 
update to FAA Order JO 7400.11. FAA Order JO 7400.11K, which lists 
Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and 
reporting points, is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES 
section of this document.

The Rule

    This action amends 14 CFR part 71 by modifying the Class D airspace 
and establishing Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above 
the surface at Chandler, Arizona, and Phoenix, Arizona, due to biennial 
airspace reviews conducted pursuant to FAA Order JO 7400.2R.
    For the Chandler Municipal Airport, Chandler, AZ, Class D airspace 
this action: (1) increases the radius from 4 miles to 4.8 miles; (2) 
increases the vertical limit from 3,000 feet MSL to up to but excluding 
4,000 feet MSL; (3) removes Williams Gateway Airport and the associated 
exclusion area as they are no longer required; (4) adds an exclusion 
area west of longitude 111[deg]53'41'' W; (5) updates the airspace 
legal description header from ``Chandler Municipal Airport, AZ'' to 
``Chandler, AZ'' to comply with changes to FAA Order JO 7400.2R; and 
(6) updates the outdated term of ``Airport/Facility Directory'' to 
``Chart Supplement.''
    For the Mesa Gateway Airport, Phoenix, AZ, this action: (1) 
increases the radius from 5 miles to 5.4 miles; (2) adds an exclusion 
area for the Chandler

[[Page 68453]]

Municipal Airport Class D airspace; (3) adds an exclusion area within a 
1.2-mile radius of Pegasus Airpark, Queen Creek, AZ; (4) updates the 
name of the airport from Williams Gateway Airport to Mesa Gateway 
Airport and updates the geographic coordinates of the airport to 
coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database; (5) updates the airspace 
legal description header from ``Chandler, AZ'' to ``Phoenix, AZ'' to 
coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database; and (6) updates the 
outdated term of ``Airport/Facility Directory'' to ``Chart 
Supplement.''
    This action establishes Class E airspace extending upward from 700 
feet above the surface at Stellar Airpark, Chandler, AZ, within a 13.9-
mile radius of the airport.
    This action establishes Class E airspace extending upward from 700 
feet above the surface at Mesa Gateway Airport, Phoenix, AZ: (1) within 
a 7.9-mile radius of the airport; (2) within 4 miles northeast and 8 
miles southwest of the 136[deg] bearing for the Mesa Gateway: RWY 30C-
LOC extending from the 7.9-mile radius of the airport to 17.7 miles 
southeast of the Mesa Gateway: RWY 30C-LOC; and (3) within 7.9 miles 
northeast and 4 miles southwest of the 136[deg] bearing from the 
airport extending from the 7.9-mile radius of the airport to 12.6 miles 
southeast of the airport.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    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 
Order 2100.6B, ``Policies and Procedures for Rulemakings'' (March 10, 
2025); and (3) is expected to result in, at most, de minimis costs from 
compliance with applicable operating requirements or minor flight 
rerouting for operators choosing to navigate around the controlled 
airspace. Since these amendments are routine and the expected impact to 
operators is de minimis, the FAA certifies that this rule, when 
promulgated, does not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical 
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance 
with FAA Order 1050.1G, ``FAA National Environmental Policy Act 
Implementing Procedures,'' Paragraph B-2.5(a). 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.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

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 14 CFR Part 71 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 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 FAA Order JO 
7400.11M, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated July 30, 
2026, and effective September 15, 2026, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace

AWP AZ D Chandler, AZ [Amended]

Chandler Municipal Airport, AZ
    (Lat. 33[deg]16'09'' N, long. 111[deg]48'40'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface up to but 
excluding 4,000 feet MSL within a 4.8-mile radius of Chandler 
Municipal Airport, excluding that portion west of longitude 
111[deg]53'41'' W. This Class D airspace area is effective during 
the specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to 
Airmen. The effective dates and times will thereafter be 
continuously published in the Chart Supplement.
* * * * *

AWP AZ D Phoenix, AZ [Amended]

Mesa Gateway Airport, AZ
    (Lat. 33[deg]18'28'' N, long. 111[deg]39'20'' W)
Pegasus Airpark, AZ
    (Lat. 33[deg]12'31'' N, long. 111[deg]37'02'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including 
3,900 feet MSL within a 5.4-mile radius of Mesa Gateway Airport, 
excluding that portion within the Chandler Municipal Airport, 
Chandler, AZ, Class D airspace; and excluding that portion within a 
1.2-mile radius of Pegasus Airpark; and excluding that portion 
within the Phoenix, AZ, Class B airspace. This Class D airspace area 
is effective during the specific dates and times established in 
advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective dates and times will 
thereafter be continuously published in the Chart Supplement.
* * * * *

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700 
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth

* * * * *

AWP AZ E5 Chandler, AZ [Establish]

Stellar Airpark, AZ
    (Lat. 33[deg]17'56'' N, long. 111[deg]54'57'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface 
within a 13.9-mile radius of Stellar Airpark.
* * * * *

AWP AZ E5 Phoenix, AZ [Establish]

Mesa Gateway Airport, AZ
    (Lat. 33[deg]18'28'' N, long. 111[deg]39'20'' W)
Mesa Gateway: RWY 30C-LOC
    (Lat. 33[deg]19'13'' N, long. 111[deg]40'09'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface 
within a 7.9-mile radius of Mesa Gateway Airport; and within 4 miles 
northeast and 8 miles southwest of the 136[deg] bearing from the 
Mesa Gateway: RWY 30C-LOC extending from the 7.9-mile radius of the 
Mesa Gateway Airport to 17.7 miles southeast of the Mesa Gateway: 
RWY 30C-LOC; and within 7.9 miles northeast and 4 miles southwest of 
the 136[deg] bearing from the Mesa Gateway Airport extending from 
the 7.9-mile radius of Mesa Gateway Airport to 12.6 miles southeast 
of the Mesa Gateway Airport.
* * * * *

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on October 28, 2026.
Jerry J. Creecy,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2026-22197 Filed 10-29-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


</pre></body>
</html>