Allow me to clarify a point that some seem to find confusing:

It is not at all unusual for an agency to develop and promulgate a
specification/recommendation as an "advisory specification/recommendation",
but not enforce the specification/recommendation in any way.

Further, it is also not unusual for another agency to reference that
recommendation/specification in a regulation, which has the force of law,
and which is enforced by this agency.

Let's take a look at an example:

"Agency A" creates a set of "Standards For Airports". The only standard is:
"All tracts of land containing an airport shall have a really big orange "A"
painted somewhere on the property." But it is strictly a standard, a
recommended method of doing something, and "Agency A" does not enforce it.

"Agency B" then creates a set of "Regulations For Airports". The only
regulation is: "All airports shall be constructed in accordance with "Agency
A"'s "Standards For Airports". And since this is a regulation, "Agency B"
will enforce the standard set by "Agency A".

I hope this makes it a bit more clear...


"Kevin" wrote in message
news:bm9yaWtv.776b3da90af75f5c14128e7e83723ba2@107 9315944.nulluser.com...
No I didn't. It seems too insane to try to repeat but the dept of
trans. "has" guidlines... they do not enforce their guidlines. The
property owner wanting the runway went to the dept of trans and they
submitted their plans. the dept typed a letter to them commending them
on their plan. I called the dept and i made a comment saying, "what
planes may use the runwy cause they didn't list any. Sure, there was a
discussion I presume but when I addressed that issue that they did not
specify what types of aircraft would be approved I was told first...
they do not approve or deny runways, they said a guy can build any
length runway he wants and the dept will not jump in. their guidlines
of 2000' plus one third elevation should work fine for a cessna but
they did not draw the line anywhere. They agreed with me that the
runway would not be long enough for come cases but .... then it gets
back to their guidlines. They told me many public runways are shorter
than that but they also admitted those runways were likely either
already in an area with minimal room or the city grew around them.
They also said runways built today would not be built as short as some
older runways. Still, a private runway on private property out of town
only needs to be approved by a planning and zoning commission and NO
ONE else.

Another interesting bit of trivia the FAA told me was that when they
DO get involved in approving runways, they do not care (not at all)
where the owner's property line ends and the neighbor's property
begins... I.E there is a one thousand foot safety zone according to
Class A "FAA" runway on each end of the runway and the FAA is not
interested if that 1000 feet is the owners property or the neighbors.
This is what the FAA told me.


You just said the Department of Transportation sets the runway
guidelines.

-Agent1