[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 81 (Wednesday, April 27, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24930-24932]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-09781]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee--New Task
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of a new task assignment for the Aviation Rulemaking
Advisory Committee.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FAA assigned the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee
(ARAC) a new task to provide recommendations regarding bird strike
protection rulemaking, policy, and guidance for normal category
rotorcraft and to provide recommendations to enhance the existing bird
strike protection standards for transport category rotorcraft. The FAA
amended its regulations to incorporate bird strike protection rules for
transport category rotorcraft in 1996. Data shows an increase in the
bird population and weight has resulted in an increase in bird strikes
with both normal category rotorcraft and transport category rotorcraft.
The increase in bird strikes has led to more frequent bird penetration
into the cockpit and cabin areas, elevating the risk of potential
serious injuries or fatalities to occupants. Direct bird impact to the
pilot has led to partial or complete pilot incapacitation in numerous
cases, increasing the risk of fatalities.
This notice informs the public of the new ARAC activity and
solicits membership for the Rotorcraft Bird Strike Working Group.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary B. Roach, Federal Aviation
Administration, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177,
[email protected], phone number 817-222-5110, facsimile number 817-
222-5961.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
ARAC Acceptance of Task
As a result of the March 23, 2016, ARAC meeting, the FAA assigned
and ARAC accepted this task establishing the Rotorcraft Bird Strike
Working Group. The Rotorcraft Bird Strike Working Group will serve as
staff to the ARAC and provide advice and recommendations on the
assigned task. The ARAC will review and accept the recommendation
report and will submit it to the FAA.
Background
The FAA established the ARAC to provide information, advice, and
recommendations on aviation-related
[[Page 24931]]
issues that could result in rulemaking, to the FAA Administrator,
through the Associate Administrator of Aviation Safety.
In 1996, a bird strike protection rule (14 CFR 29.631) was adopted
requiring that transport category rotorcraft be designed to ensure
continued safe flight and landing (for Category A) or safe landing (for
Category B) following an impact with a 2.2-pound bird. At that time,
bird strike protection was not adopted for normal category rotorcraft.
As of 2015, normal category rotorcraft comprise over 90% of rotorcraft
operating in the U.S. The data from the FAA's Wildlife Strike Database
indicates about 75% of reported bird strikes from 1990-2013 were with
normal category rotorcraft. These percentages suggest that the absence
of bird strike protective requirements for normal category rotorcraft
results in increased risk for the majority of U.S. rotorcraft.
Further analysis of rotorcraft data from the FAA's Wildlife Strike
Database indicates a 68% increase in bird strikes since 2009 and more
than a 700% increase since the early 2000s. In raw numbers, the
percentages translate from around 25 reports of rotorcraft bird strikes
per year in the early 2000s, to 121 strikes in 2009, to 204 strikes in
2013. Using rotorcraft flight hours to perform a rate-based analysis,
reported bird strikes increased 49% in the five year period from 2010
to 2014 (3.99 per 100,000 flight hours to 5.95 per 100,000 flight
hours). Better event reporting accounts for some of this increase, but
the rapid escalation goes beyond reporting improvements alone. One
conjecture is the increase may be caused by the growing population of
birds in general, a growing population of larger birds, quieter
aircraft, and an increase in the number of rotorcraft operations.
In addition to the increased frequency of bird strikes, the FAA has
observed increased strikes to the rotorcraft windscreen area with a
force of impact that has directly endangered occupants and elevated the
risk to safe rotorcraft operations. Bird penetration into the cockpit
and cabin areas has become increasingly common, elevating the
probability of potential serious injuries or fatalities to occupants.
Moreover, direct bird impact to the pilot has led to partial or
complete pilot incapacitation in numerous cases, often causing an
increased risk for loss of control of the rotorcraft and fatalities.
The typical scenario is that the bird strikes and shatters a portion of
the front windscreen. The bird's remains, as well as damaged portions
of the rotorcraft (such as the windscreen), either hit the pilot in the
head, neck, or upper torso, or proceed through the cockpit to strike
the passengers or crew.
These recent observations reinforce previous findings from the
study, Bird Strikes to Civil Helicopters in the United States, 1990-
2005 (2006), by Cleary, Dolbeer, and Wright, based on 15 years of data
from the FAA's National Wildlife Database. The study concluded that:
(1) Helicopters were significantly more likely to be damaged by bird
strikes than airplanes, (2) windshields on helicopters were more
frequently struck and damaged than windshields on airplanes, and (3)
helicopter bird strikes were more likely to lead to injuries to crew or
passengers than airplane bird strikes. The NTSB referenced these same
findings in its accident report of a 2009 fatal rotorcraft accident in
Morgan City, LA, where a bird strike was determined to be the probable
cause of the accident (NTSB Aircraft Accident Report No. CEN09MA117).
Some bird strike events where the bird penetrates the cockpit and
cabin have received less attention either because the damage was
limited to the windscreen or because the injury to the crew and
passengers was minor. However, a superficial examination of the
rotorcraft damage and occupant injury levels is misleading. The FAA has
found that most of these cases had less to do with the sufficiency of
aircraft design and equipage, and more to do with the crew's personal
protective gear--such as helmets--that mitigated the potential event
severity. Other cases of low severity are the result of fortuitous
circumstance. One specific example occurred during a March 2015 police
operation in Dallas, Texas, where a bird penetrated the cockpit and
struck the pilot, who was not wearing a helmet. The pilot was
incapacitated by the impact and--under ordinary circumstances--the
event would likely have led to a fatal outcome from loss of rotorcraft
control. However, the left seat occupant happened to be a rated
helicopter pilot, something that was not typical for the police
operation being conducted. The left seat occupant then assumed control
of the rotorcraft and landed without incident. The result was an event
with a low-severity outcome, but the underlying lesson from the
relatively benign consequence cannot be dismissed.
While the absence of any bird strike requirements for normal
category rotorcraft must be addressed, data shows that bird strikes
with transport category rotorcraft are a growing concern, especially
encounters with larger birds. Transport category rotorcraft are more
likely to spend extended time in the en route phase of flight and fly
at higher altitudes. While the higher altitude would appear to reduce
the probability of encountering bird strike, data shows an increased
altitude does not mitigate the severity of damage when a bird strike
occurs. A United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) study found
that, of the 32 damaging strikes that occurred to U.S. rotorcraft in
2014, 72% of those occurred more than 500 feet above ground level. The
study opined that the more severe damage was likely attributable to the
higher speed of the rotorcraft during the en route phase of flight. The
increased exposure of transport category rotorcraft in this environment
suggests the existing 2.2-pound bird strike requirement may not be
adequate.
Whether normal category or transport category, the unique operating
profile of a helicopter leads to a different exposure to bird strike
risk than does fixed-wing aircraft. The study, Wildlife strikes to
civil helicopters in the U.S., 1990-2011 (2013) by Washburn, Cisar, and
Default, discusses some of the differences. It concluded that, unlike
with fixed-wing aircraft, helicopter bird strikes occur with greatest
frequency during the en route phase of flight and in the off-airfield
environment. It credits bird strikes that occur in the off-airfield
environment as accounting for the majority of bird strike-related human
injuries and fatalities for helicopters. Since helicopters operate at
much lower altitudes than fixed-wing aircraft, the exposure to the risk
of a bird strike is not limited to the departure and arrival phases of
flight, but instead remains for the duration of the flight profile.
The Task
The Rotorcraft Bird Strike Working Group will provide advice and
recommendations to the ARAC on bird strike protection rulemaking,
policy, and guidance for parts 27 and 29. The Rotorcraft Bird Strike
Working Group is tasked to:
1. For normal category rotorcraft, specifically advise and make
written recommendations on how to incorporate bird strike protection
requirements into the part 27 airworthiness standards for newly type
certificated rotorcraft.
2. For normal category rotorcraft, specifically advise and make
written recommendations on how the bird strike protection requirements
in Task 1 should be made effective via Sec. 27.2 for newly
manufactured rotorcraft.
3. For transport category rotorcraft, specifically advise and make
written recommendations on how to enhance
[[Page 24932]]
the Sec. 29.631 bird strike protection airworthiness standard in light
of increases in bird weight and increased exposure to bird strikes for
newly type certificated rotorcraft.
4. For transport category rotorcraft, specifically advise and make
written recommendations on how the bird strike protection requirements
in Task 3 should be made effective via Sec. 29.2 for newly
manufactured rotorcraft.
5. For normal and transport category rotorcraft, specifically
advise and make written recommendations on incorporating rotorcraft
bird strike protection improvements and standards into the existing
rotorcraft fleet.
6. For Tasks 1 through 5, consider existing non-traditional bird
strike protection technology, including the use of aircraft flight
manual limitations (such as requiring airspeed limitations at lower
altitudes), when making the recommendations. These considerations must
include: An evaluation of the effectiveness of such technology,
assumptions used as part of that evaluation, validation of those
assumptions, and any procedures to be used for operation with the
technology or with the aircraft limitations.
7. Based on the recommendations in Tasks 1 through 6, specifically
advise and make written recommendations for the associated policy and
guidance.
8. Based on the Rotorcraft Bird Strike Working Group
recommendations, perform the following:
a. Estimate what the regulated parties would do differently as a
result of the proposed recommendation and how much it would cost.
b. Estimate the safety improvements of future bird encounters from
the proposed recommendations.
c. Estimate any other benefits (e.g., reduced administrative
burden) or costs that would result from implementation of the
recommendations.
9. Develop a report containing recommendations on the findings and
results of the tasks explained above. The report should document:
a. Both majority and dissenting positions on the findings and the
rationale for each position.
b. Any disagreements, including the rationale for each position and
the reasons for the disagreement.
10. The working group may be reinstated to assist the ARAC in
responding to the FAA's questions or concerns after the recommendation
report has been submitted.
Schedule
The recommendation report should be submitted to the FAA for review
and acceptance no later than 18 months after publication of this notice
in the Federal Register.
Working Group Activity
The Rotorcraft Bird Strike Working Group must comply with the
procedures adopted by the ARAC as follows:
1. Conduct a review and analysis of the assigned tasks and any
other related materials or documents.
2. Draft and submit a work plan for completion of the task,
including the rationale supporting such a plan, for consideration by
the ARAC.
3. Provide a status report at each ARAC meeting.
4. Draft and submit the recommendation report based on review and
analysis of the assigned tasks.
5. Present the recommendation report at the ARAC meeting.
Participation in the Working Group
The Rotorcraft Bird Strike Working Group will be comprised of
technical experts having an interest in the assigned task. A working
group member need not be a member representative of the ARAC. The FAA
would like a wide range of members (normal category rotorcraft
manufacturers, transport category rotorcraft manufacturers, and
rotorcraft operators from various segments of the industry such as oil
and gas exploration, emergency medical services, and air tour
operators) to ensure all aspects of the tasks are considered in
development of the recommendations. The provisions of the August 13,
2014, Office of Management and Budget guidance, ``Revised Guidance on
Appointment of Lobbyists to Federal Advisory Committees, Boards, and
Commissions'' (79 FR 47482), continues the ban on registered lobbyists
participating on Agency Boards and Commissions if participating in
their ``individual capacity.'' The revised guidance now allows
registered lobbyists to participate on Agency Boards and Commissions in
a ``representative capacity'' for the ``express purpose of providing a
committee with the views of a nongovernmental entity, a recognizable
group of persons or nongovernmental entities (an industry, sector,
labor unions, or environmental groups, etc.) or state or local
government.'' (For further information, see Lobbying Disclosure Act of
1995 as amended, 2 U.S.C. 1603, 1604, and 1605.)
If you wish to become a member of the Rotorcraft Bird Strike
Working Group, write the person listed under the caption FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT expressing that desire. Describe your interest in
the task and state the expertise you would bring to the working group.
The FAA must receive all requests by May 27, 2016. The ARAC and the FAA
will review the requests and advise you whether or not your request is
approved.
If you are chosen for membership in the working group, you must
actively participate in the working group, attend all meetings, and
provide written comments when requested. You must devote the resources
necessary to support the working group in meeting any assigned
deadlines. You must keep your management and those you may represent
advised of working group activities and decisions to ensure the
proposed technical solutions do not conflict with the position of those
you represent. Once the working group has begun deliberations, members
will not be added or substituted without the approval of the ARAC
Chair, the FAA, including the Designated Federal Officer, and the
Working Group Chair.
The Secretary of Transportation determined the formation and use of
the ARAC is necessary and in the public interest in connection with the
performance of duties imposed on the FAA by law.
The ARAC meetings are open to the public. However, meetings of the
Rotorcraft Bird Strike Working Group are not open to the public, except
to the extent individuals with an interest and expertise are selected
to participate. The FAA will make no public announcement of working
group meetings.
Issued in Washington, DC, on April 19, 2016.
Lirio Liu,
Designated Federal Officer, Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee.
[FR Doc. 2016-09781 Filed 4-26-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P