[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 238 (Tuesday, December 10, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 65142-65145]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-31446]
[[Page 65141]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part V
Department of Transportation
_______________________________________________________________________
Federal Aviation Administration
_______________________________________________________________________
14 CFR Parts 121 and 135
Digital Flight Data Recorder Rules Revisions; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 238 / Tuesday, December 10, 1996 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 65142]]
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Parts 121 and 135
[Docket No. 28109; Notice No. 96-7A]
RIN 2120-AF76
Revisions to Digital Flight Data Recorder Rules
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document proposes to revise the Federal Aviation
Administration's (FAA's) recent Notice of Proposed Rulemaking entitled
``Revisions to Digital Flight Data Recorder Rules,'' that was published
July 16, 1996. In this document, the FAA proposes to modify the
previously proposed flight data recorder requirements to make them
applicable to those airplanes placed on the operations specifications
of a U.S. operator after a certain date. This document also proposes a
two-year compliance date for certain aircraft that must be retrofitted
with flight data recorder equipment as a result of a change in policy
announced in the NPRM. The first revision is being proposed to close an
unintended loophole in the current regulation that was repeated in the
NPRM. The second change is needed to allow operators time to comply
with the rule following the change in policy. The FAA is also
soliciting additional comment concerning aircraft that should be
exempted from the proposed DFDR upgrade.
DATES: Comments on this proposed revision must be received by December
30, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Comments on this notice should be mailed in triplicate to:
Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Chief Counsel, Attention:
Rules Docket (AGC-200), Docket No. 28109, 800 Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20591. Comments delivered must be marked Docket No.
28109. Comments may also be submitted electronically to the following
Internet address: [email protected]. Comments may be examined in
Room 915G weekdays, except on Federal holidays, between 8:30 a.m. and 5
p.m.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Frank Rock, Aircraft Engineering
Division, Aircraft Certification Service, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591,
telephone (202) 267-9567.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
Interested persons are invited to participate in the making of the
proposed rule by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as
they may desire. Comments relating to the environmental, energy,
federalism, or economic impact that might result from adopting the
proposal in this notice are also invited. Substantive comments should
be accompanied by cost estimates. Comments should identify the
regulatory docket or notice number and should be submitted in
triplicate to the Rules Docket address specified above. All comments
received on or before the closing date for comments specified will be
considered by the Administrator before taking action on this proposed
rulemaking. The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in
light of comments received. All comments received will be available,
both before and after the closing date for comments, in the Rules
Docket for examination by interested persons. A report summarizing each
substantive public contact with FAA personnel concerned with this
rulemaking will be filed in the docket. Commenters wishing the FAA to
acknowledge receipt of their comments submitted in response to this
notice must include a pre-addressed, stamped postcard on which the
following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket No. 28109.'' The
postcard will be date-stamped and mailed to the commenter.
Availability of SNPRM's
An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded from the FAA
regulations section of the Fedworld electronic bulletin board service
(telephone: 703-321-3339), the Federal Register's electronic bulletin
board service (telephone: 202-512-1661), or the FAA's Aviation
Rulemaking Advisory Committee Bulletin Board service (telephone: 202-
267-5948). A modem and suitable communications software are required.
Internet users may reach the FAA's web page at http://www.faa.gov
or the Federal Register's web page at http://www.access.gpo.gov/
su__docs for access to recently published rulemaking documents.
Any person may obtain a copy of this SNPRM by submitting 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. Communications must identify the notice number or docket
number of this SNPRM.
Persons interested in being placed on the mailing list for future
Notices of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM's) should request from the above
office a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking Distribution System, that describes the application
procedure.
Background and Discussion of Proposal
On July 16, 1996, the FAA published an NPRM (Notice No. 96-7, 61 FR
37144) entitled ``Revisions to Digital Flight Data Recorder Rules.''
That document proposed that operators be required to record additional
parameters of flight data on certain airplanes, and requested public
comment. The comment period closed on August 15; the FAA received 21
comments to the proposed rule. Since the closing of the comment period,
some additional issues have come to the FAA's attention that are
related to the issues addressed in the NPRM but are outside the scope
of that document. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this Supplemental
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to present the new proposals and allow
time for public comment.
Aircraft Registered Outside the United States
Current Sec. 135.152(a) requires that airplanes operated under Part
135 that were brought onto the U.S. register after October 11, 1991, be
equipped with digital flight data recorders. The particular language
``brought onto the U.S. register'' was used when the rule was adopted
in 1988 as a means to identify those airplanes that would be required
to have DFDR's installed. At the time, the FAA had considered whether
to require the retrofit of all existing airplanes operating under part
135 with DFDR's or require a retrofit based on a date of manufacture or
on some other basis. Based on economic analysis and a recommendation
from National Transportation Safety Board personnel, the FAA determined
that the ``brought onto the U.S. register'' language would avoid an
expensive retrofit of airplanes already operating in the United States.
The agency also concluded that the ``brought onto the U.S. register''
language would deter the importation of older non-DFDR equipped
airplanes into the United States.
This same language was included in Notice 96-7 as proposed
Sec. 121.344a(a) in order to maintain the same applicability for
airplanes that will be
[[Page 65143]]
operated under part 121 as of March 20, 1997, when the ``commuter
rule'' takes effect.
In reviewing Notice 96-7, however, the FAA discovered that it had
overlooked one possible effect of the 1988 language--that Part 135
operators would acquire non-DFDR equipped airplanes that were
registered outside the United States and decide not to place them on
the U.S. register. These aircraft could be operated as foreign-
registered airplanes in accordance with Sec. 135.25, but would not be
subject to the DFDR requirements of Sec. 135.152. The FAA has
determined that there is no justification for excluding these aircraft
from the DFDR requirements, considering the agency's policy, as
detailed in Notice 96-7, concerning the necessity of upgrading flight
data recorders.
Accordingly, the FAA is proposing to change the requirement in
current Sec. 135.152(a) and in proposed Sec. 121.344a(a), by describing
the group of airplanes that must be equipped with DFDR's as those that
are either brought onto the U.S. register after October 11, 1991, or
are foreign-registered and were added to an operator's U.S. operations
specifications after October 11, 1991.
This change would have a limited effect on carriers operating under
part 135 and those that will operate under part 121. Information
available to the FAA indicates that there are no operators currently
taking advantage of this rule language by operating foreign-registered
airplanes in the United States under part 135. Accordingly, no costs
are expected to result from this change in the rule. The FAA has
determined that the change will have only a prospective effect and
prevent the domestic operation of foreign-registered airplanes that are
not equipped with digital flight data recorders.
Since there are no airplanes currently operating that would be
affected by this change in the rule, the FAA has no basis to estimate
whether there are airplanes that, in the future, would have been
brought into the U.S. for operation under part 135 while maintaining
foreign registration. Accordingly, it would be speculative for the FAA
to presume a specific number of airplanes and estimate a cost of DFDR
retrofit for them because the rule would no longer allow operation
without a DFDR.
The FAA solicits comment on the impact of this proposal, and
particularly needs to know if there are any foreign-registered
airplanes that are not equipped with an appropriate flight data
recorder and are operating under the provisions of part 135. The FAA
specifically requests data concerning the costs involved with bringing
such airplanes into compliance with the flight data recorder
requirements as proposed.
Compliance Time for Changed Policy
The NPRM also contained a clarification of the meaning of the
phrase ``brought onto the U.S. register after October 11, 1991''
language as it applies to part 135 aircraft that were removed from the
U.S. register and brought back onto the register after October 11,
1991. As explained in the preamble to the original proposed rule,
airplanes that were on the register before October 11, 1991, but were
removed from the register and brought back on after October 11, 1991,
would have to be retrofitted to be in compliance with Sec. 135.152. A
previous FAA interpretation erroneously concluded that these airplanes
were somehow ``grandfathered'' (and thus did not have to have flight
data recorders installed). This former interpretation was found to be
inconsistent with the text of the rule (61 FR at 37154, July 16, 1996).
Several commenters to the NPRM state that because of the previous
interpretation, their airplanes that were manufactured before October
11, 1991, did not have to have digital flight data recorders installed,
and that to do so now would be expensive. The commenters argue that the
date of manufacture should be used in determining applicability, rather
than the date the aircraft were brought onto the U.S. register, so that
older aircraft will not be required to upgrade to digital flight data
recorders.
The FAA disagrees. In drafting the NPRM, the FAA considered whether
to change the applicability for aircraft operating under part 135, and
determined that it was best to maintain the date brought on the U.S.
register as the determining factor for applicability of the rule
requiring installation of a DFDR. The FAA recognized that whatever date
is used (e.g., manufacture or registration) would present a burden to
some operators.
Nor does the FAA agree that some airplanes should be allowed to be
removed from the U.S. register and be brought back without complying
with the regulations in effect at the time of return, simply because
they were manufactured prior to October 11, 1991. Since the adoption of
the rule, the FAA has always intended that when airplanes are added to
the U.S. register, they meet the standards in existence at the time,
and that intent is clear from the language of the regulation. When that
regulation was adopted in 1988, the determination was made that date of
manufacture would not be used so as not to perpetuate the use (and
import) of older aircraft to avoid the installation of digital flight
data recorders.
The factors that were discussed in Notice 96-7 concerning the need
for flight data information apply to all aircraft. Flight data recorder
information is often a critical investigative tool; the current part
135 regulations were issued, and the amendments proposed, to ensure
that all aircraft record flight data to the maximum extent feasible.
Operators that consider certain aircraft beyond the range of cost-
effective retrofit were invited to submit information why those
aircraft models should be excluded. As discussed below, such
information was received on only one aircraft model.
While the FAA determined that airplanes removed from the U.S.
register are not grandfathered and must meet the requirements for
flight data recorders, no time for delayed compliance was proposed in
Notice 96-7 for aircraft that may have been operating under the old
interpretation. To relieve the burden of immediate compliance, the FAA
is proposing that operators of these airplanes may take up to two years
to install the required flight data recorders. The proposed compliance
time of two years may appear inconsistent with the four-year compliance
time proposed elsewhere in Notice 96-7, but the four-year compliance
time is intended for those airplanes undergoing an upgrade from current
requirements. The two-year compliance time proposed here is for certain
operators that thought their aircraft were grandfathered to meet the
current requirements of part 135, not for installation of an upgrade.
The FAA solicits comments that include the number of airplanes that
would be affected by this proposed two-year delayed compliance, as well
as the appropriateness of a two-year compliance time.
Aircraft Excluded From Upgrade Requirements
Finally, several comments on the NPRM included airplanes that the
commenters thought should be excluded from the applicability of the
digital flight data recorder upgrades. Except for the DeHavilland DHC-6
(Twin Otter), however, the comments contained little or no support for
the exclusion of these airplanes. As the FAA stated in the NPRM,
requests that aircraft to be excluded ``should contain a detailed
explanation of the reasons why these aircraft should be included on the
list [of exclusions], and the number of aircraft that would be
[[Page 65144]]
affected'' (61 FR at 37153). The simple statement that an aircraft is
out of production is insufficient for the FAA to make a decision on
whether exclusion of the airplane is appropriate. Persons who commented
on this issue are invited to resubmit their comments with the necessary
explanation, number of airplanes affected, and any retrofit cost data
that may be available.
The FAA did not propose an exemption paragraph for part 135 similar
to that proposed for part 121 because the FAA has no information
suggesting that there are specific airplane types that cannot readily
comply with the requirements of Sec. 135.152(a). The only aircraft
currently under consideration for exclusion from the rule is the
DeHavilland DHC-6 using the information provided in the comments
referenced above. The FAA has determined that if there is only one
airplane type under consideration for exclusion, it would be more
appropriate to provide relief under an exemption pursuant to 14 CFR
part 11. However, no determination on this will be made until after the
close of the comment period for this supplemental notice, since the
agency is inviting those persons who submitted other airplane types for
exclusion to submit more information in support of their comments.
The FAA is also proposing to revise the language of current
Secs. 135.152(a) and (d), and Appendices B and C of part 135, to
reflect that the industry standard for recorders is a 25-hour recorder,
rather than the 8-hour recorder currently required. The FAA is unaware
of any 8-hour recorder currently being used and has determined that
this change would result in no costs to operators. The FAA requests
that commenters submit any information to the contrary concerning usage
of 8-hour recorders and any costs associated with the proposed change
in the standard.
International Compatibility
The FAA has reviewed corresponding International Civil Aviation
Organization standards and Joint Aviation Authority regulations, where
they exist. Any differences between those documents and these
regulations are of a minor, technical nature, and are deemed
insignificant. They would not adversely affect harmonization.
Paperwork Reduction Act
No information collection has been proposed.
Regulatory Evaluation Summary
The FAA does not anticipate that the revisions proposed in this
SNPRM would alter the costs as developed in Notice 96-7 and has not
altered the cost estimates. The reasons for this are twofold. First,
regarding the proposed amendment to Secs. 121.244a(a) and 135.152(a) to
add the date a foreign-registered aircraft is placed on the operations
specifications of a carrier, the FAA does not know of any carriers
currently operating foreign-registered airplanes in domestic service.
Even if such aircraft are being operated, they would already have been
accounted for because the FAA's fleet estimates are derived from
domestic air carrier operations specifications. Air carrier data for
part 121 operators provided to the FAA by the Air Transport Association
accounted for about 80 percent of the domestic fleet; these data were
adjusted to reflect the U.S. domestic fleet as estimated by the FAA's
Economic Forecast Branch. Similarly, detailed data from the Regional
Airline Association (RAA) is presumed to reflect the RAA's fleet
estimates based on the operations specification of part 135 operators,
and already included any foreign-registered airplanes that may be
operated in domestic service.
Second, the cost estimates contained in Notice 96-7 apply only to
the upgrade of digital flight data recorders as proposed in that
notice. Any costs associated with the installation of the flight data
recorders as required under current Sec. 135.152 (and the policy
statement discussed) were contained in the original costs estimates
generated for that rulemaking in 1988. The policy statement under which
some operators did not install flight data recorders was made after
that regulation was in place.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Determination
The FAA has determined that the costs associated with this rule
have been considered and discussed in previous rulemaking actions, and
therefore has not made a duplicate determination for this SNPRM.
Information currently available to the FAA indicates that the revisions
proposed in this SNPRM, as described above, do not have any costs
associated with them, and seeks any information to the contrary.
International Trade Impact Assessment
The FAA has determined that the proposed amendments pertain to only
U.S. operators and will not have an impact on International trade.
Conclusion
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the FAA has determined
that this proposed regulation would be a nonsignificant regulatory
action under Executive Order 12866, and is considered nonsignificant
under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, Feb. 26,
1979).
List of Subjects
14 CFR Part 121
Air carriers, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Transportation.
14 CFR Part 135
Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements
The Proposed Amendment
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR parts 121 and 135 of the
Federal Aviation Regulations as follows:
PART 121--OPERATING REQUIREMENTS: DOMESTIC, FLAG, AND SUPPLEMENTAL
OPERATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 121 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 40119, 44101, 44701-44702,
44705, 44709-44711, 44713, 44716-44717, 44722, 44901, 44903-44904,
44912, 46105.
2. In Sec. 121.344a, the introductory text of paragraph (a), as
proposed in the Federal Register issue of July 16, 1996, (61 FR 37161),
is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 121.344a Digital flight data recorders for 10-19 seat airplanes.
(a) No person may operate a turbine-engine-powered airplane having
a passenger seating configuration, excluding any required crewmember
seat, of 10 to 19 seats, that was either brought onto the U.S. register
after or was registered outside the United States and added to an
operator's U.S. operations specifications after October 11, 1991,
unless it is equipped with one or more approved flight recorders that
use a digital method of recording and storing data and a method of
readily retrieving that data from the storage medium. On or before [4
years after the effective date of the final rule], airplanes brought
onto the U.S. register or registered outside of the United States and
added to an air carrier's operations specifications after October 11,
1991, must comply with either the requirements in this section or the
applicable paragraphs in Sec. 135.152 of this chapter. In addition, by
[4 years after the effective date of the final rule]--
* * * * *
[[Page 65145]]
PART 135--OPERATING REQUIREMENTS: COMMUTER AND ON-DEMAND OPERATIONS
3. The authority citation for part 135 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701-44702, 44705, 44709,
44711-44713, 44715-44717, 44722.
4. Section 135.152(a) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 135.152 Flight recorders.
(a) No person may operate a multi-engine, turbine-engine-powered
airplane or rotorcraft having a passenger seating configuration,
excluding any required crewmember seat, of 10 to 19 seats, that was
either brought onto the U.S. register after or was registered outside
the United States and added to the operator's U.S. operations
specifications after October 11, 1991, unless it is equipped with one
or more approved flight recorders that use a digital method of
recording and storing data and a method of readily retrieving that data
from the storage medium. On or before [2 years after the effective date
of the final rule], aircraft brought onto the U.S. register or
registered outside of the United States and added to an air carrier's
operations specifications after October 11, 1991, must record the
parameters specified in either Appendix B or C of this part, as
applicable. The parameters must be recorded within the range, accuracy,
resolution, and recording intervals as specified. The recorder shall
retain no less than 25 hours of aircraft operation.
* * * * *
Sec. 135.152 [Amended]
5. In Sec. 135.152(d), the first sentence is amended by removing
the phrase ``8 hours'' and adding the phrase ``25 hours'' in its place.
Appendix B to Part 135--[Amended]
6. In Appendix B to part 135, Airplane Flight Recorder
Specifications, in the ``Range'' column, the first entry is amended by
removing the phrase ``8 hr minimum'' and adding the phrase ``25 hr
minimum'' in its place.
Appendix C to Part 135--[Amended]
7. In Appendix C to part 135, Helicopter Flight Recorder
Specifications, in the ``Range'' column, the first entry is amended by
removing the phrase ``8 hr minimum'' and adding the phrase ``25 hr
minimum'' in its place.
Issued in Washington, DC, on December 5, 1996.
Elizabeth Yoest,
Acting Director, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 96-31446 Filed 12-9-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P