The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has finalized amendments to Class D and Class E4 airspace surrounding Wilkes-Barre/Scranton International Airport in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania. Published in the Federal Register on January 22, 2026, this final rule addresses shortcomings in the existing airspace designations that fail to adequately contain instrument flight rule (IFR) operations. Effective May 14, 2026, the changes include a slight expansion of the Class D radius, reconfiguration of Class E4 extensions, updates to geographic coordinates, and removal of language indicating part-time air traffic control tower operations. This development underscores the FAA's ongoing efforts to ensure airspace configurations support safe and efficient aviation, particularly as air traffic patterns evolve.
Background and Rationale
Class D airspace extends from the surface to a specified altitude, typically around airports with operational control towers, to manage traffic and separate IFR and visual flight rule (VFR) aircraft. Class E4 airspace serves as an extension to Class D, providing additional controlled airspace for IFR arrivals and departures. The amendments stem from the FAA's recognition that the current configurations at Wilkes-Barre/Scranton International Airport do not fully encompass existing IFR procedures, potentially compromising safety and operational efficiency.
The airport, located at latitude 41°20'19" N and longitude 75°43'24" W, handles a mix of commercial, general aviation, and cargo flights. According to FAA Order JO 7400.11K, which designates airspace and is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1, periodic reviews ensure alignments with instrument procedures. In this case, the FAA identified the need for adjustments through internal assessments, leading to a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) published on November 24, 2025, in the Federal Register (90 FR 52901). The NPRM invited public input, highlighting the agency's commitment to transparency in airspace management.
Key players include the FAA's Eastern Service Center, responsible for airspace operations in the region, and the airport authority, which operates the 24-hour control tower. No broader political forces appear at play, as this is a technical adjustment under the FAA's authority in Title 49 of the United States Code, specifically Section 40103, which mandates regulations for safe and efficient airspace use.
Key Changes in the Rule
The final rule modifies Class D airspace by increasing its radius from 4.1 miles to 4.2 miles around the airport, extending upward to 3,500 feet mean sea level (MSL). This expansion ensures better containment of IFR operations within the controlled zone.
For Class E4 airspace, the amendments reconfigure the extensions: one extends 2 miles on each side of a 033° bearing from the airport, from the 4.2-mile radius to 9.4 miles northeast; the other extends 1 mile on each side of a 214° bearing, from the 4.2-mile radius to 7.3 miles southwest. These adjustments align with standard instrument approach procedures, such as those for runways at the airport, preventing aircraft from inadvertently exiting controlled airspace during critical phases of flight.
Additionally, the rule updates the airport's geographic coordinates for accuracy and removes references to part-time tower operations in the Class E4 description. As noted in the supplementary information, the tower now operates continuously, eliminating the need for notices to airmen (NOTAMs) about variable hours.
These changes are detailed in the amended paragraphs 5000 and 6004 of FAA Order JO 7400.11K, effective September 15, 2025, with the rule's implementation set for May 14, 2026, to allow for charting updates and pilot notifications.
Regulatory Process and Public Input
The rulemaking followed standard procedures under the Administrative Procedure Act. The NPRM provided a 45-day comment period, during which one submission was received from the Citizens Rulemaking Alliance. The comment, accompanied by a petition, urged withdrawal of the rule or delays, mistakenly treating the NPRM as a final action. It also requested additional analyses under the Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive Order 12866, along with comparative maps and identification of specific instrument procedures.
In response, the FAA clarified that the comment was premature, as no final rule had been issued at the time, and affirmed compliance with notice-and-comment requirements. The agency determined the airspace changes were straightforward, negating the need for extra materials like GIS shapefiles. No good cause was found to bypass public input, and the FAA proceeded without such exemptions.
Regulatory analyses confirmed the rule is not a 'significant regulatory action' under Executive Order 12866, nor does it impose significant economic impacts on small entities per the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Environmentally, it qualifies for categorical exclusion under FAA Order 1050.1G, with no anticipated significant impacts or extraordinary circumstances.
This process reflects precedents in similar FAA actions, such as amendments at other regional airports where airspace is adjusted for evolving flight procedures without broad controversy.
Implications and Perspectives
In the short term, these amendments will enhance safety by ensuring IFR aircraft remain in controlled airspace, reducing risks of conflicts with VFR traffic. Pilots and air traffic controllers at Wilkes-Barre/Scranton will benefit from clearer boundaries, potentially streamlining operations at an airport serving northeastern Pennsylvania.
Long-term implications include improved adaptability to future traffic growth or procedural changes. As aviation technology advances, such as with performance-based navigation, airspace designations must evolve, setting a model for similar updates nationwide.
Different perspectives emerge from stakeholders. Aviation safety advocates may view this as a proactive measure, aligning with the FAA's mission. The single commenter expressed concerns over procedural transparency, advocating for more detailed disclosures in rulemaking. Airport operators likely support the changes for operational efficiency, while general aviation users might appreciate the minimal disruption. No endorsements are implied, but these views highlight the balance between regulatory efficiency and public engagement.
The rule's minimal economic footprint suggests broad acceptance, though ongoing debates in aviation policy often center on balancing safety with administrative burdens.
In summary, the FAA's amendments to Class D and Class E4 airspace at Wilkes-Barre/Scranton International Airport represent a targeted effort to align designations with operational needs. Key takeaways include enhanced IFR containment, updated coordinates, and recognition of full-time tower operations. Looking ahead, implementation will involve updates to aeronautical charts and pilot briefings. Potential next steps could include monitoring for further adjustments based on traffic data or technological shifts. Challenges may arise if air traffic patterns change rapidly, prompting additional reviews, while debates on rulemaking transparency persist in broader FAA contexts. This action exemplifies the agency's role in maintaining a dynamic national airspace system.
