C.F.R. » Title 14 » CHAPTER I—FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION › SUBCHAPTER E—AIRSPACE › PART 77—SAFE, EFFICIENT USE, AND PRESERVATION OF THE NAVIGABLE AIRSPACE › Subpart C—Standards for Determining Obstructions to Air Navigation or Navigational Aids or Facilities

14 C.F.R. § 77.17

Obstruction standards

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) An existing object, including a mobile object, is, and a future object would be an obstruction to air navigation if it is of greater height than any of the following heights or surfaces:

(1) A height of 499 feet AGL at the site of the object.

(2) A height that is 200 feet AGL, or above the established airport elevation, whichever is higher, within 3 nautical miles of the established reference point of an airport, excluding heliports, with its longest runway more than 3,200 feet in actual length, and that height increases in the proportion of 100 feet for each additional nautical mile from the airport up to a maximum of 499 feet.

(3) A height within a terminal obstacle clearance area, including an initial approach segment, a departure area, and a circling approach area, which would result in the vertical distance between any point on the object and an established minimum instrument flight altitude within that area or segment to be less than the required obstacle clearance.

(4) A height within an en route obstacle clearance area, including turn and termination areas, of a Federal Airway or approved off-airway route, that would increase the minimum obstacle clearance altitude.

(5) The surface of a takeoff and landing area of an airport or any imaginary surface established under § 77.19, 77.21, or 77.23. However, no part of the takeoff or landing area itself will be considered an obstruction.

(b) Except for traverse ways on or near an airport with an operative ground traffic control service furnished by an airport traffic control tower or by the airport management and coordinated with the air traffic control service, the standards of paragraph (a) of this section apply to traverse ways used or to be used for the passage of mobile objects only after the heights of these traverse ways are increased by:

(1) 17 feet for an Interstate Highway that is part of the National System of Military and Interstate Highways where overcrossings are designed for a minimum of 17 feet vertical distance.

(2) 15 feet for any other public roadway.

(3) 10 feet or the height of the highest mobile object that would normally traverse the road, whichever is greater, for a private road.

(4) 23 feet for a railroad.

(5) For a waterway or any other traverse way not previously mentioned, an amount equal to the height of the highest mobile object that would normally traverse it.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2002–2026 · leading case: One Energy Ents., L.L.C. v. Dept. of Transp., 2019 Ohio 359 (Ohio Ct. App. 2019).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
One Energy Ents., L.L.C. v. Dept. of Transp., 2019 Ohio 359 (Ohio Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 9× “{¶ 8} 14 C.F.R. 77.17 identifies objects which constitute obstructions to air navigation.”
Town of Barnstable v. Fed. Aviation Admin., 740 F.3d 681 (D.C. Cir. 2014). · cites it 2× ““Therefore, even if the proposed wind turbines exceeded an obstruction standard in 14 CFR § 77.17 , they would not adversely affect VFR operations.”
BFI Waste Sys. of North Am., Inc. v. Fed. Aviation Admin., 293 F.3d 527 (D.C. Cir. 2002). “” 14 C.F.R. § 77.17 (a). The information contained in the Form 7460-1 is meant to provide the FAA with a basis for determining “the possible hazardous effect of the proposed construction or alteration on air navigation.”
Backcountry Against Dumps v. Faa, 77 F.4th 1260 (9th Cir. 2023). “14 C.F.R. § 77.17 (a)(1). The FAA conducts aeronautical studies on projects that propose constructing structures that obstruct air navigation, and, based on the aeronautical study, the FAA determines whether the proposed object poses a hazard to air navigation.”
Tessa Warren, individually & in her capacity as Adm'x of the Est. of Kevin M. Warren v. Appalachian Power C (wvactapp 2026). · cites it 13× “Warren could not demonstrate that it was negligent based on its failure to mark or remove the inactive powerlines, because those lines existed prior to the FAA’s enactment and did not meet the criteria set forth in 14 C.F.R. § 77.17 for an existing object to be considered an…”
Friends of Merry meeting Bay v. Cent. Maine Power Co. (Me. Super. Ct 2021). · cites it 2× “Plaintiffs argument here rests on two related assertions: 1) the Chops Passage where CMP build the towers is not a navigable airway; and 2) the towers are not an “obstruction to air navigation” according to 14 C.F.R. § 77.17 . Plaintiffs first assert that Chops Passage fails to…”
Tuscola Area Airport Auth. v. Stephen Dickson (D.C. Cir. 2020). “The FAA then performed a full aeronautical study and determined that the turbines would generate clutter on the primary radar used by the airport for air traffic control but that the aggregate impact on air safety would be negligible.”
— 14 C.F.R. § 77.17(a)(1) — 1 case
One Energy Ents., L.L.C. v. Dept. of Transp., 2019 Ohio 359 (Ohio Ct. App. 2019). “{¶ 8} 14 C.F.R. 77.17 identifies objects which constitute obstructions to air navigation.”
— 14 C.F.R. § 77.17(a)(2) — 1 case
One Energy Ents., L.L.C. v. Dept. of Transp., 2019 Ohio 359 (Ohio Ct. App. 2019). “{¶ 8} 14 C.F.R. 77.17 identifies objects which constitute obstructions to air navigation.”
— 14 C.F.R. § 77.17(a)(5) — 1 case
One Energy Ents., L.L.C. v. Dept. of Transp., 2019 Ohio 359 (Ohio Ct. App. 2019). “{¶ 8} 14 C.F.R. 77.17 identifies objects which constitute obstructions to air navigation.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.