[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 10 (Tuesday, January 15, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 2912-2916]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-00608]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 121

[Docket No. FAA-2012-0929; Notice No. 13-02]
RIN 2120-AJ17


Prohibition on Personal Use of Electronic Devices on the Flight 
Deck

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The proposed rule would prohibit flightcrew members in 
operations under part 121 from using a personal wireless communications 
device or laptop computer for personal use while at their duty station 
on the flight deck while the aircraft is being operated. This rule, 
which conforms FAA regulations with recent legislation, is intended to 
ensure that certain non-essential activities do not contribute to the 
challenge of task management on the flight deck or a loss of 
situational awareness due to attention to non-essential tasks.

DATES: Send comments on or before March 18, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2012-0929 
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your 
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S. 
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room 
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket 
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at 202-493-2251.
    Privacy: The FAA will post all comments it receives, without 
change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal 
information the commenter provides. Using the search function of the 
docket Web site, anyone can find and read the electronic form of all 
comments received into any FAA docket, including the name of the 
individual sending the comment (or signing the comment for an 
association, business, labor union, etc.). DOT's complete Privacy Act 
Statement can be found in the Federal Register published on April 11, 
2000 (65 FR 19477-19478), as well as at http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at 
http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions 
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140 
of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical questions concerning 
this proposed rule, contact Nancy Lauck Claussen, Air Transportation 
Division (AFS-200), Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation 
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; 
telephone (202) 267-8166; email Nancy.L.Claussen@faa.gov.
    For legal questions concerning this action, contact Nancy Sanchez, 
Office of the Chief Counsel, Regulations Division, AGC-200, Federal 
Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 
20591; telephone (202) 267-3073; email Nancy.Sanchez@faa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: See the ``Additional Information'' section 
for information on how to comment on this proposal and how the FAA will 
handle comments received. The ``Additional Information'' section also 
contains related information about the docket, privacy, the handling of 
proprietary or confidential business information. In addition, there is 
information on obtaining copies of related rulemaking documents.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety is found in 
Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section

[[Page 2913]]

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 49 
U.S.C. 44701(a)(5), which requires the Administrator to promulgate 
regulations and minimum standards for other practices, methods, and 
procedures necessary for safety in air commerce and national security, 
and 49 U.S.C. 44732(d), which requires the Administrator to issue a 
final rule to carry out the prohibition of personal use of electronic 
devices on the flight deck by flightcrew members.

Table of Contents

I. Overview of Proposed Rule
II. Background
    A. Related Rule
    B. Statement of the Problem
    C. National Transportation Safety Board Recommendation
III. Discussion of the Proposal
    A. Requirements
    B. Current Air Carrier Programs
    C. Operational Timeframes for Prohibition
    D. Personal Wireless Communications Device
IV. Regulatory Notices and Analyses
    A. Regulatory Evaluation
    B. Regulatory Flexibility Determination
    C. International Trade Impact Assessment
    D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment
    E. Paperwork Reduction Act
    F. International Compatibility
    G. Environmental Analysis
V. Executive Order Determinations
    A. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
    B. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
    C. Executive Order 13211, Regulations That Significantly Affect 
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
VI. Additional Information
    A. Comments Invited
    B. Availability of Rulemaking Documents
VII. The Proposed Amendment

I. Overview of Proposed Rule

    The FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 was enacted on 
February 14, 2012. Section 307 of the Act, Prohibition on Personal Use 
of Electronic Devices on the Flight Deck, makes it ``unlawful for a 
flight crewmember of an aircraft used to provide air transportation 
under part 121 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, to use a 
personal wireless communications device or laptop computer while at the 
flight crewmember's duty station on the flight deck of such an aircraft 
while the aircraft is being operated.'' The legislation also states 
that this prohibition does not apply to the use of a personal wireless 
communications device or laptop computer for a purpose directly related 
to operation of the aircraft, or for emergency, safety-related, or 
employment-related communications, in accordance with procedures 
established by the air carrier and the FAA. The FAA is proposing to 
amend part 121 to conform to this legislation. The FAA proposes to 
amend 14 CFR 121.542 to add language to prohibit flightcrew members 
operating under part 121 from using a personal wireless communications 
device or a laptop computer for personal use while at their duty 
station on the flight deck while the aircraft is being operated. The 
amended regulatory language will clarify that the prohibition on use of 
a personal wireless communications device or laptop computer does not 
apply to the use of a personal wireless communications device or laptop 
computer for a purpose directly related to the operation of the 
aircraft, or for emergency, safety-related, or employment-related 
communications, in accordance with procedures established by the air 
carrier and approved by the FAA.

II. Background

A. Related Rule

    In 1981, the FAA published the Elimination of Duties and Activities 
of Flightcrew Members Not Required for the Safe Operation of Aircraft 
Final Rule.\1\ This rule, better known as the ``Sterile Cockpit'' rule, 
required air carriers operating under parts 121 and 135, as well as 
flightcrew members in those operations, to ensure that the environment 
on the flight deck was free from potentially dangerous distractions. 
The final rule states that air carriers shall not require their 
flightcrew members to perform non-safety related duties during critical 
phases of flight and that flightcrew members shall not conduct non-
safety related activities which could cause distractions on the flight 
deck during critical phases of flight. In addition, the rule further 
states that the pilot-in-command shall not permit any activity during a 
critical phase of flight which would distract flightcrew members from 
the performance of their duties which, in effect, extends the sterile 
cockpit provisions to other crewmembers, such as flight attendants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 46 FR 5500 (Jan. 19, 1981).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 1981 rule defines the critical phases of flight as all ground 
operations involving taxi, take-off and landing, and all other flight 
operations conducted below 10,000 feet, except cruise flight.
    The personal use of personal wireless communications devices and 
laptop computers for non-safety related activities is prohibited by the 
broad restrictions in the current ``Sterile Cockpit'' rule during 
ground operations involving taxi, take-off and landing, and all other 
flight operations conducted below 10,000 feet. The proposed 
requirements in this NPRM would extend the prohibition on personal use 
of personal wireless communications devices and laptop computers to all 
phases of flight.

B. Statement of the Problem

    Several recent incidents involving a breakdown of sterile cockpit 
discipline have prompted Congress to address this issue in the FAA 
Modernization and Reform Act of 2012. In one instance, two pilots were 
using their personal laptop computers during cruise flight and lost 
situational awareness, leading to a 150 mile fly-by of their 
destination. In another instance, a pilot sent a text message on her 
personal cell phone during the taxi phase of the flight, after the 
aircraft pushed back from the gate and before the take-off sequence. 
These incidents illustrate the potential for such devices to create a 
hazardous distraction during critical phases of flight.
    This rule is intended to ensure that certain non-essential 
activities do not contribute to the challenge of task management on the 
flight deck and do not contribute to a loss of situational awareness 
due to attention to non-essential activities, as the previously 
discussed incidents highlight. Situational awareness is an attention 
based phenomenon that reflects the flightcrew's knowledge of where the 
aircraft is in regard to location, air traffic control, weather, 
regulations, aircraft status, and other factors. A lack of situational 
awareness can affect a pilot's ability to perform effectively regarding 
aircraft handling, aircraft systems, aircraft mode awareness, 
environmental hazards, standard operating procedures, and attention to 
required tasks. When loss of situational awareness occurs, there can be 
critical consequences, such as missing information from one source when 
concentrating on another source, altitude or course deviations, 
dominance of visual cues to the extent that pilots may not hear certain 
aural warnings, misinterpreting ATC instructions, or experiencing task 
overload.
    An individual can lose situational awareness due to attentional 
tunneling and attention to non-essential activities. Attentional 
tunneling is becoming absorbed in a task to the exclusion of other 
visual and aural inputs, and is also a factor in the breakdown of task 
management. This is operationally

[[Page 2914]]

described as ``the allocation of attention to a particular channel of 
information, diagnostic hypothesis, or task goal, for a duration that 
is longer than optimal, given the expected cost of neglecting events on 
other channels, failing to consider other hypotheses, or failing to 
perform other tasks.'' \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Wickens, C.D., Alexander, A.L. Attentional tunneling and 
task management in synthetic vision displays. The International 
Journal of Aviation Psychology, 19(3), 182-199 (2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The ``party'' situation, when a person at a loud crowded party 
usually listens to one conversation and can easily ignore all others, 
is a commonplace example of attentional tunneling.\3\ In some ways, 
attentional tunneling helps people handle a situation with a high 
number of visual and aural inputs. However, it can also block important 
visual and aural information. Because flightcrew members must attend to 
many safety-related tasks during aircraft operations and must manage 
those tasks effectively, attentional tunneling can introduce risks into 
the system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Cherry, E.C., On human communication: A review, a survey, 
and a criticism. Cambridge: Technology Press, MIT; New York: John 
Wiley (1957).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, flightcrew members could lose situational awareness 
when a personal electronic device used on the flight deck is 
inconsistent with the type certified flight deck design philosophy. The 
inconsistency could provide distraction, confusion, and ultimately 
contribute to a loss of situational awareness.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See 76 FR 6088 (Feb. 3, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. National Transportation Safety Board Recommendation

    In its recommendations to the FAA regarding the Colgan accident in 
2009, the NTSB concluded that because of the continuing number of 
accidents involving a breakdown in sterile cockpit discipline, 
collaborative action by the FAA and the aviation industry to promptly 
address this issue was warranted.
    Therefore, the NTSB recommended (A-10-30) that the FAA require all 
part 121, 135, and 91K operators to incorporate explicit guidance to 
pilots, including checklist reminders as appropriate, prohibiting the 
use of personal portable electronic devices on the flight deck.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/reports/2010/aar1001.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response to NTSB recommendation A-10-30, the FAA issued 
Information for Operators (InFO) 10003, Cockpit Distractions, on April 
26, 2010. The NTSB responded that this action did not fully address the 
recommendation because the InFO was advisory only.\6\ With this 
proposed rulemaking, the FAA will amend current regulations to prohibit 
the use of personal wireless communications devices and laptop 
computers by flightcrew members during all aircraft operations to 
address this type of distraction on the flight deck.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The NTSB closed recommendation A-10-30 as unacceptable on 
June 14, 2012. Summaries of the NTSB and FAA letters on A-10-30 can 
be found at http://www.ntsb.gov/SafetyRecs/Private/history.aspx?rec=A-10-030&addressee=FAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion of the Proposal

A. Requirements

    The proposed requirements would prohibit the personal use of a 
personal wireless communications device or laptop computer while a 
flightcrew member is at his or her duty station during all ground 
operations involving taxi, takeoff and landing, and all other flight 
operations. The proposed rule does not prohibit the use of personal 
wireless communications devices or laptop computers if the purpose is 
directly related to operation of the aircraft, or for emergency, 
safety-related, or employment-related communications and the use is in 
accordance with air carrier procedures approved by the Administrator.
    The FAA clarifies that ``emergency'' communications are those 
related to the safe operation of the aircraft and its occupants, not a 
flightcrew member's personal emergency. Additionally, the FAA clarifies 
that ``employment-related'' communications are not at the discretion of 
the pilot but are part of FAA approved operational procedures regarding 
the use of personal wireless communications devices or laptop 
computers. For example, in the previously noted situation with pilots 
who became distracted when using a personal laptop while discussing the 
air carrier's flight scheduling software, the flight schedules may have 
been ``employment-related,'' but the personal use of laptop computers 
during the discussion was not part of FAA approved operational 
procedures and would be prohibited by the proposed rule.

B. Current Air Carrier Programs

    Several air carriers currently have FAA approved programs or are in 
the process of developing programs for FAA approval where laptop 
computers and personal wireless communications devices, such as 
tablets, are used by flightcrew members for work related activities 
during flight operations. In some cases, air carriers own the laptop 
computers and/or personal wireless communications devices used by 
flightcrew members. In other cases, flightcrew members own the laptop 
computer and/or personal wireless communications devices.
    The FAA clarifies that the provisions of the proposed rule do not 
require an ``ownership'' test regarding the laptop computer or personal 
wireless communications device. These devices can be owned by the air 
carrier or the flightcrew member. The provisions of the proposed rule 
require a ``use'' test. These devices (regardless of who owns them) may 
not be used for personal use (e.g. personal communications, personal 
emails, leisure activities, etc) while the flightcrew member is at his 
or her duty station while the aircraft is being operated.

C. Operational Timeframes for Prohibition

    Section 307 of the Act states that it is unlawful to use a device 
for personal use ``while the aircraft is being operated''. The meaning 
of an ``aircraft being operated'' as it pertains to some FAA 
regulations is very broad, to include being parked at the gate while 
passengers are boarding. The FAA clarifies that for the purposes of 
this rule, the meaning of an ``aircraft being operated'' mirrors the 
definition of ``flight time'' in 14 CFR 1.1. Therefore, the prohibition 
on the personal use of laptop computers and personal wireless devices 
commences at taxi (movement of the aircraft under its own power) and 
ends when the aircraft is parked at the gate at the end of the flight 
segment.

D. Personal Wireless Communications Device

    Section 307 of the Act defines ``personal wireless communications 
device'' as a device through which personal wireless services (as 
defined in Section 332(c)(7)(C)(i) of the Communications Act of 1934) 
are transmitted.\7\ The Communications Act of 1934 states that personal 
wireless services means commercial mobile services, unlicensed wireless 
services, and common carrier wireless exchange access service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See 47 U.S.C. 332(c)(7)(C)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In general, wireless telecommunications is the transfer of 
information between two or more points that are not physically 
connected. In the proposed rule, the FAA retains the same broad 
category because a list of specific devices would ignore the reality of 
evolving technology. This broad category of devices includes, but is 
not limited to, devices such as cell phones,

[[Page 2915]]

smartphones, personal digital assistants, tablets, e-readers, gaming 
systems, netbook computers, and notebook computers.

IV. Regulatory Notices and Analyses

A. Regulatory Evaluation

    Changes to Federal regulations must undergo several economic 
analyses. First, Executive Order 12866 directs that each Federal agency 
shall propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination 
that the benefits of the intended regulation justify its costs. Second, 
the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) requires 
agencies to analyze the economic impact of regulatory changes on small 
entities. Third, the Trade Agreements Act (Pub. L. 96-39) prohibits 
agencies from setting standards that create unnecessary obstacles to 
the foreign commerce of the United States. In developing U.S. 
standards, the Trade Act requires agencies to consider international 
standards and, where appropriate, that they be the basis of U.S. 
standards. Fourth, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 
104-4) requires agencies to prepare a written assessment of the costs, 
benefits, and other effects of proposed or final rules that include a 
Federal mandate likely to result in the expenditure by State, local, or 
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 
million or more annually (adjusted for inflation with base year of 
1995). This portion of the preamble summarizes the FAA's analysis of 
the economic impacts of this proposed rule.
    The Department of Transportation Order DOT 2100.5 prescribes 
policies and procedures for simplification, analysis, and review of 
regulations. If the expected cost impact is so minimal that a proposed 
or final rule does not warrant a full evaluation, this order permits 
that a statement to that effect and the basis for it to be included in 
the preamble if a full regulatory evaluation of the cost and benefits 
is not prepared. Such a determination has been made for this proposed 
rule. The reasoning for this determination follows:
    The FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, enacted on February 
14, 2012, includes Section 307, Prohibition on Personal Use of 
Electronic Devices on the Flight Deck. The FAA is proposing to amend 
part 121 to conform to this legislation. The proposed rule would 
prohibit flightcrew members in operations under part 121 from using a 
wireless communications device or laptop computer for personal use 
while at their duty station on the flight deck while the aircraft is 
being operated. This proposed rule is intended to ensure that certain 
non-essential activities do not contribute to the challenge of task 
management on the flight deck and do not contribute to a loss of 
situational awareness due to attention to non-essential activities. The 
FAA expects that this proposed rule reflects current sterile cockpit 
operating procedures and therefore does not impose more than a minimum 
cost on any regulated entity.
    The FAA has, therefore, determined that this proposed rule is not a 
``significant regulatory action'' as defined in section 3(f) of 
Executive Order 12866, and is not ``significant'' as defined in DOT's 
Regulatory Policies and Procedures.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Determination

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) (RFA) 
establishes ``as a principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall 
endeavor, consistent with the objectives of the rule and of applicable 
statutes, to fit regulatory and informational requirements to the scale 
of the businesses, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions 
subject to regulation. To achieve this principle, agencies are required 
to solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain 
the rationale for their actions to assure that such proposals are given 
serious consideration.'' The RFA covers a wide-range of small entities, 
including small businesses, not-for-profit organizations, and small 
governmental jurisdictions. Agencies must perform a review to determine 
whether a rule will have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. If the agency determines that it will, the 
agency must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis as described in 
the RFA. However, if an agency determines that a rule is not expected 
to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities, section 605(b) of the RFA provides that the head of the 
agency may so certify and a regulatory flexibility analysis is not 
required. The certification must include a statement providing the 
factual basis for this determination, and the reasoning should be 
clear.
    The FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 was enacted on 
February 14, 2012. Section 307 of the Act, Prohibition on Personal Use 
of Electronic Devices on the Flight Deck, the FAA is proposing to amend 
part 121 to conform to this legislation. The proposed rule would 
prohibit flightcrew members in operations under part 121 from using a 
wireless communications device or laptop computer for personal use 
while at their duty station on the flight deck while the aircraft is 
being operated. This rule is intended to ensure that certain non-
essential activities do not contribute to the challenge of task 
management on the flight deck and do not contribute to a loss of 
situational awareness due to attention to non-essential activities. 
While this proposed rule affects small entities, it merely revises 
existing FAA rules and does not impose any cost on any regulated 
entity.
    Therefore, the FAA certifies that this proposed rule would not have 
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. The FAA solicits comments regarding this determination.

C. International Trade Impact Assessment

    The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39) prohibits Federal 
agencies from establishing any standards or engaging in related 
activities that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of 
the United States. Legitimate domestic objectives, such as safety, are 
not considered unnecessary obstacles. The statute also requires 
consideration of international standards and, where appropriate, that 
they be the basis for U.S. standards. The FAA has assessed the 
potential effect of this proposed rule and has determined that it would 
have only a domestic impact and therefore no affect on international 
trade.

D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-
4) requires each Federal agency to prepare a written statement 
assessing the effects of any Federal mandate in a proposed or final 
agency rule that may result in an expenditure of $100 million or more 
(adjusted annually for inflation with the base year 1995) in any one 
year by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by 
the private sector; such a mandate is deemed to be a ``significant 
regulatory action.'' The FAA currently uses an inflation-adjusted value 
of $143.1 million in lieu of $100 million. This proposed rule does not 
contain such a mandate.

E. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires 
that the FAA consider the impact of paperwork and other information 
collection burdens imposed on the public. The FAA has determined that 
there would be no new requirement for information collection associated 
with this proposed rule.

[[Page 2916]]

F. International Compatibility

    In keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on 
International Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to conform to 
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards and 
Recommended Practices to the maximum extent practicable. The FAA has 
determined that there are no ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices 
that correspond to these proposed regulations.

G. Environmental Analysis

    FAA Order 1050.1E identifies FAA actions that are categorically 
excluded from preparation of an environmental assessment or 
environmental impact statement under the National Environmental Policy 
Act in the absence of extraordinary circumstances. The FAA has 
determined this rulemaking action qualifies for the categorical 
exclusion identified in paragraph 312f and involves no extraordinary 
circumstances.

V. Executive Order Determinations

A. Executive Order 12866 and 13563

    See the ``Regulatory Evaluation'' discussion in the ``Regulatory 
Notices and Analyses'' section elsewhere in this preamble.

B. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    The FAA has analyzed this proposed rule under the principles and 
criteria of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The agency has 
determined that this action would not have a substantial direct effect 
on the States, or the relationship between the Federal Government and 
the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among 
the various levels of government, and, therefore, would not have 
Federalism implications.

C. Executive Order 13211, Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    The FAA analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211, 
Actions Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). The agency has determined that it 
would not be a ``significant energy action'' under the executive order 
and would not be likely to have a significant adverse effect on the 
supply, distribution, or use of energy.

VI. Additional Information

A. Comments Invited

    The FAA invites interested persons to participate in this 
rulemaking by submitting written comments, data, or views. The agency 
also invites comments relating to the economic, environmental, energy, 
or federalism impacts that might result from adopting the proposals in 
this document. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion 
of the proposal, explain the reason for any recommended change, and 
include supporting data. To ensure the docket does not contain 
duplicate comments, commenter's should send only one copy of written 
comments, or if comments are filed electronically, commenters should 
submit only one time.
    The FAA will file in the docket all comments it receives, as well 
as a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA 
personnel concerning this proposed rulemaking. Before acting on this 
proposal, the FAA will consider all comments it receives on or before 
the closing date for comments. The FAA will consider comments filed 
after the comment period has closed if it is possible to do so without 
incurring expense or delay. The agency may change this proposal in 
light of the comments it receives.

B. Availability of Rulemaking Documents

    An electronic copy of rulemaking documents may be obtained from the 
Internet by--
    1. Searching the Federal eRulemaking Portal (http://www.regulations.gov);
    2. Visiting the FAA's Regulations and Policies Web page at http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies or
    3. Accessing the Government Printing Office's Web page at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/.
    Copies may also be obtained by sending a request to the Federal 
Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence 
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling (202) 267-9680. 
Commenter's must identify the docket or notice number of this 
rulemaking.
    All documents the FAA considered in developing this proposed rule, 
including economic analyses and technical reports, may be accessed from 
the Internet through the Federal eRulemaking Portal referenced in item 
(1) above.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 121

    Air carriers, Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety, Safety, 
Transportation.

VII. The Proposed Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation 
Administration proposes to amend chapter I of title 14, Code of Federal 
Regulations as follows:

PART 121--OPERATING REQUIREMENTS: DOMESTIC, FLAG, AND SUPPLEMENTAL 
OPERATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 121 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 40119, 41706, 44101, 44701-
44702, 44705, 44709-44711, 44713, 44716-44717, 44722, 44732, 46105.

0
2. Amend Sec.  121.542 by adding paragraph (d) to read as follows:


Sec.  121.542  Flight crewmember duties.

* * * * *
    (d) During all flight time as defined in 14 CFR 1.1, no flight 
crewmember may use, nor may any pilot in command permit the use of, a 
personal wireless communications device or laptop computer while at a 
flight crewmember duty station unless the purpose is directly related 
to operation of the aircraft, or for emergency, safety-related, or 
employment-related communications, in accordance with air carrier 
procedures approved by the Administrator.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on January 9, 2013.
John M. Allen,
Director, Flight Standards Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-00608 Filed 1-14-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P