The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register to modify Class E airspace at Driggs/Reed Memorial Airport in Driggs, Idaho. Released on November 25, 2025, this proposal aims to adjust the airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface to better accommodate changes in instrument flight rules (IFR) procedures at the airport. By reducing unnecessary airspace extensions, the FAA seeks to enhance safety and efficiency for pilots conducting IFR operations in this mountainous region of eastern Idaho. This development reflects ongoing efforts to refine airspace designations in response to evolving aviation needs, potentially setting a model for similar adjustments at other regional airports.
Background on Class E Airspace and Its Role at Driggs/Reed Memorial Airport
Class E airspace is a category of controlled airspace that extends from 700 feet or more above the ground and is designed to protect aircraft during IFR operations, which involve flying by instruments rather than visual references. At airports like Driggs/Reed Memorial, located in a rural area near the Teton Range, this airspace ensures safe transitions for arriving and departing flights, especially in variable weather conditions. The airport serves general aviation, including recreational and business flights, and is a gateway to nearby national parks.
The current proposal stems from modifications to the airport's instrument flight procedures (IFPs), such as approaches using Area Navigation (RNAV) and Global Positioning System (GPS) technology. These updates allow for more precise navigation, reducing the need for expansive airspace buffers. According to the NPRM, the changes are necessary to 'more appropriately contain' these procedures within regulatory airspace, as stated in the document. This aligns with the FAA's broader mandate under Title 49 of the United States Code, specifically Section 40103, which charges the agency with ensuring the safe and efficient use of navigable airspace.
Historically, airspace modifications at small airports like Driggs/Reed often follow advancements in navigation technology. For instance, similar adjustments have occurred at other Western U.S. airports, such as those in Montana and Wyoming, where terrain challenges necessitate tailored airspace designs. The FAA references Order JO 7400.11K, which governs airspace designations and is updated annually, as the framework for this proposal.
Details of the Proposed Airspace Modifications
The NPRM outlines specific reductions to the Class E airspace to eliminate areas no longer required for IFP containment. The northern extension would be narrowed by 4.3 miles and shortened by 5.5 miles to better fit the RNAV (GPS)-A approach procedure. The southwest extension would be narrowed by 1.3 miles, shortened by 1.3 miles, and shifted half a mile west to accommodate the RNAV (GPS) Runway 4 approach.
Additionally, the southeastern third of the existing airspace would be removed entirely, as it is deemed unnecessary for current procedures. The western portion beyond the airport's 4.8-mile radius, specifically between the 220-degree and 315-degree radials, would also be eliminated. These changes aim to create a more condensed airspace footprint, described in the proposed amendment as: 'That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within an area 1.2 miles northwest and 3.4 miles southeast of the airport's 028-degree bearing extending to its 5.8-mile radius, within an area 3.4 miles southeast and 2.7 miles northwest of the airport's 208-degree bearing extending to 11.7 miles southwest, within an area between the airport's 241-degree bearing clockwise to its 326-degree bearing extending to the airport's 4.8-mile radius, and within an area 1.7 miles west and 3 miles east of the airport's 345-degree bearing extending to 8.9 miles north of the airport.'
An administrative update would correct the airport's geographic coordinates in the legal description to match the FAA's database, ensuring accuracy in official records. Nathan A. Chaffman, an FAA operations support specialist, is listed as the contact for further information, highlighting the agency's structured approach to such proposals.
Regulatory Authority and Public Involvement
The FAA's authority for this rulemaking derives from Subtitle VII of Title 49, which empowers the agency to regulate airspace for aviation safety. The proposal is not classified as a 'significant regulatory action' under Executive Order 12866, nor does it require a full regulatory evaluation due to its minimal economic impact, as determined by the FAA. It falls under routine amendments to keep technical regulations current, per Department of Transportation policies.
Public participation is a key element, with comments due by January 9, 2026. The NPRM invites input on regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and energy aspects, emphasizing that the most useful comments reference specific proposal elements and provide supporting data. Comments can be submitted via the federal eRulemaking portal or mail, and the FAA will consider them before finalizing the rule. This process underscores transparency, allowing stakeholders like local pilots, airport operators, and environmental groups to weigh in. For example, environmental reviews under FAA Order 1050.1G will assess potential impacts, though the proposal anticipates minimal effects given its focus on airspace reduction.
Potential Implications and Perspectives
From a safety perspective, these modifications could reduce the risk of airspace incursions by aligning boundaries more closely with actual flight paths, benefiting IFR pilots in the region's challenging terrain. Economically, the changes might streamline operations at Driggs/Reed Memorial, potentially attracting more aviation activity without imposing burdens on small entities, as certified under the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Different viewpoints exist. Aviation advocacy groups, such as the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, may support the proposal for enhancing efficiency, while local communities could express concerns about noise or environmental effects, though the NPRM suggests limited impact. Broader political forces, including federal aviation policy under the Department of Transportation, emphasize modernization, but debates over airspace management in rural areas often highlight tensions between national standards and local needs.
In terms of precedents, this proposal echoes cases like the 2020 airspace adjustments at Jackson Hole Airport in Wyoming, where similar IFP updates led to refined Class E boundaries. Long-term, such changes could influence how the FAA approaches airspace in mountainous Western states, balancing safety with minimal regulatory footprint.
The proposed modifications to Class E airspace at Driggs/Reed Memorial Airport represent a targeted effort to adapt to technological advancements in aviation navigation. Key takeaways include enhanced safety through precise airspace containment and opportunities for public input. Moving forward, the FAA may finalize the rule after reviewing comments, potentially incorporating adjustments. Ongoing challenges could involve integrating future IFP innovations or addressing environmental concerns in subsequent reviews. Debates may continue on optimizing airspace for regional airports, highlighting the need for adaptive federal policies in aviation management.
