[Federal Register: January 24, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 16)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 3777-3784]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr24ja03-38]
[[Page 3777]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part VIII
Department of Transportation
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Aviation Administration
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
14 CFR Parts 71, et al.
Special Operating Rules for the Conduct of Instrument Flight Rules
(IFR) Area Navigation (RNAV) Operations Using Global Positioning
Systems (GPS) in Alaska; Proposed Rule
[[Page 3778]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Parts 71, 91, 95, 121, 125, 129, and 135
[Docket No. FAA-2003-14305; Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. 97]
RIN 2120-AH93
Special Operating Rules for the Conduct of Instrument Flight
Rules (IFR) Area Navigation (RNAV) Operations Using Global Positioning
Systems (GPS) in Alaska
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Under this Special Federal Aviation Regulation, the FAA
proposes to allow the use of Global Positioning System/Wide Area
Augmentation Systems for the en route portion of flights on routes in
Alaska outside the operational service volume of ground based
navigation aids. The use of aircraft navigation equipment other than
area navigation systems, that only permit navigation to or from ground-
based navigation stations, often results in less than optimal routes or
instrument procedures and an inefficient use of airspace. This SFAR
would optimize routes and instrument procedures and provide for a more
efficient use of airspace. Further, it would result in an associated
increase in flight safety.
DATES: Send your comments on or before February 24, 2003.
ADDRESSES: Address your comments to the Docket Management System, U.S.
Department of Transportation, Room Plaza 401, 400 Seventh Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. You must identify the docket number, FAA-
2003-14305, at the beginning of your comments, and you should submit
two copies of your comments. If you wish to receive confirmation that
the FAA received your comments, include a self-addressed, stamped
postcard. You may also submit comments through the Internet to http://dms.dot.gov.
You may review the public docket containing comments to
these proposed regulations in person in the Dockets Office between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The
Dockets Office is on the plaza level of the NASSIF Building at the
Department of Transportation at the above address. Also, you may review
public dockets on the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donald W. Streeter, Flight
Technologies and Procedures Division (AFS-400), Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone: (202) 385-4567; e-mail: donald.w.streeter@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
The FAA invites interested persons to participate in this
rulemaking by submitting written comments, data, or views. We also
invite 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. We ask that you send us two copies of written
comments.
We will file in the docket all comments received, as well as a
report summarizing each substantive public contact made with FAA
personnel concerning this proposed rulemaking. The docket is available
for public inspection before and after the comment closing date. If you
wish to review the docket in person, go to the address in the ADDRESSES
section of this preamble between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. You may also review the docket using
the Internet at the web address in the ADDRESSES section.
Before acting on this proposal, we will consider all comments
received on or before the closing date for comments. We will consider
comments filed late if it is possible to do so without incurring
expense or delay. We may change this proposal in light of the comments
received.
If you want the FAA to acknowledge receipt of your comments on this
proposal, include with your comments a pre-addressed, stamped postcard
on which the docket number appears. We will stamp the date on the
postcard and mail it to you.
Availability of Rulemaking Documents
You can get an electronic copy of rulemaking documents through the
Internet by:
(1) Searching the Department of Transportation's electronic Docket
Management System (DMS) Web page (http://dms.dot.gov/search);
(2) Visiting the Office of Rulemaking's Web page at http://www.faa.gov/avr/armhome.htm
; or
(3) Accessing the Federal Register's Web page at http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/aces140.html
.
You also can get a copy 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. Make
sure to identify the docket number or notice number of this rulemaking.
Background
Aviation is critical to Alaska for routine travel and commerce, and
for nearly any kind of emergency. Only 10% of Alaska is accessible by
road, and waterways are impassable most of each year. Alaska also is
very large and crisscrossed by mountains that block radio and radar
transmissions so that aviation services and infrastructure that are
available in the 48 contiguous states are not available in many areas
of Alaska. Aviation is essential to Alaska, but there also is a safety
consequence of operating in this environment: The aviation accident
rate for rural Alaska is 2.5 times the average for the rest of the
United States. While approximately 20 airports in Alaska are serviced
by large turbine and jet aircraft, scheduled and unscheduled air
carrier service using single or light-twin engine aircraft that are
often limited to visual flight rules operations is provided to
approximately 1000 other airports and landing areas. Pilots operating
these flights often face weather hazards--fog, ice-fog, white-out or
flat-light conditions that are localized and change rapidly. Weather
information is limited; there are few navigational aids; and radar
coverage is largely unavailable below 5,000 feet. Areas of intense
icing and short distances between destinations often keep flight
operations below 2,000 feet.
The Capstone Program is a joint initiative by the FAA Alaskan
Region and the aviation industry to improve safety and efficiency in
Alaska by using new technologies. Derived from the National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and industry recommendations,
Capstone was congressionally funded in October 1998, and under the FAA
Acquisition and Management System, operations and maintenance funding
will begin in 2004.
Capstone Phase I focuses on southwest Alaska (the Yukon and
Kuskokwim River Delta--YK Delta), which is isolated, has limited
infrastructure, and has the same high rate of aviation accidents
experienced in the rest of the state. Under Capstone, installation of
advanced avionics in the YK Delta aircraft began in November 1999 and
expansion of ground infrastructure and data collection will continue
through December 2004. An interim analysis by the University of
[[Page 3779]]
Alaska and The MITRE Corporation Center for Advanced Aviation System
Development indicates a 40 percent reduction in aircraft accidents that
are instrument flight rules equipped under the Capstone program verses
aircraft that are unequipped.
Relying on lessons learned during Phase I, Capstone Phase II is
beginning in southeast Alaska. A more robust set of avionics, that
include Global Positioning Systems/Wide Area Augmentation Systems (GPS/
WAAS), is being deployed that aims at further reduction of controlled
flight into terrain and mid-air collision accidents. In addition,
instrument flight rules (IFR) area navigation (RNAV) procedures are
being introduced that enable participants to conduct IFR operations on
published routes, improving overall safety and capacity.
Area navigation (RNAV) systems used in most aircraft operations
consist of a navigation computer, a coded database containing preloaded
ground-based navigational aids, instrument approach procedures,
standard departure procedures, and standard arrival routes to certain
terminal areas. The navigation computer can also be manually loaded to
input the latitude and longitude of certain fixes defining an area
navigation route. RNAV systems also have the capability of processing
transmitted signals from various kinds of navigation aids to
continuously update the accuracy of the navigation computer in the
lateral and vertical modes of operation. Unlike aircraft very high
frequency omnidirectional range (VOR) navigation systems, for example,
RNAV systems can be programmed to navigate directly to any geographic
reference point (latitude and longitude) on the earth without having to
navigate to or from ground-based VOR stations over published routes
that are defined by ground-based VOR stations.
The current operating rules under the Federal Aviation Regulations
in title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) do not
accommodate the use of GPS/WAAS technology for IFR RNAV outside the
operational service volume of ground-based navigation aids. This SFAR
would allow the timely approval of approximately 200 aircraft that are
being equipped under Capstone Phase II to conduct IFR RNAV operations
using GPS/WAAS navigation systems. Additionally, this SFAR would
provide the opportunity for air carrier and general aviation operators,
other than those participating in the Capstone Program, to voluntarily
equip aircraft with advanced GPS/WAAS avionics that are manufactured,
certified, and approved for IFR RNAV operations.
Statement of the Problem
A significant number of mid-air collisions, controlled flight into
terrain, and weather-related accidents occur in Alaska. These accidents
can be significantly reduced by the use of new aircraft navigation
technologies such as GPS/WAAS IFR RNAV systems. However, operating
rules under the current FAA regulations do not fully accommodate the
use of GPS/WAAS technology for IFR RNAV operations. While a review of
national operating rules continues in order to fully accommodate RNAV
operations for the National Airspace System (NAS), a timely SFAR needs
to be issued because initial GPS/WAAS avionics equipage is scheduled in
Alaska between December 2002 and April 2003 under the FAA Capstone
Phase II Program.
NTSB Recommendation: Recommendation A-95-121 From NTSB Safety Study
In 1995, the NTSB conducted a study (NTSB Safety Study--Aviation
Safety in Alaska, NTSB/SS-95/03, November 1995) to examine ``Alaska's
current aviation environment and air transportation activities, to
identify the associated risk factors and safety deficiencies, and to
recommend practical measures for managing the risks to safe flight
operations given the reality of Alaska's aviation environment and the
potential of new technologies.'' The following is a NTSB recommendation
(A-95-121) from this safety study that substantiates the need for this
SFAR.
Implement, by December 31, 1997, a model program in the Arctic
and southeast regions of Alaska to demonstrate a low altitude
instrument flight rules (IFR) system that better fulfills the needs
of Alaska's air transportation system. The model should include the
following components:
(1) The use of the global positioning system (GPS) as a sole
source of navigational information for en route navigation and for
nonprecision instrument approaches at a representative number of
airports where instrument approaches do not currently exist.
(Operators participating in the program will have to be allowed to
conduct these operations without the integrity monitoring functions
of the wide area augmentation system (WAAS) until WAAS is fully
implemented in the demonstration region.)
(2) The use of satellite-based voice communications and
satellite-based, Mode S, or VHF data link (for aircraft position and
altitude) between aircraft in flight and air traffic controllers.
(3) The operation of commercial, passenger-carrying flight under
IFR in turbine-powered single-engine airplanes equipped with
redundant sources of electrical power and gyroscopic instrument
vacuum/pressure.
(4) The use of currently uncontrolled airspace for IFR
departures, en route flight, and instrument approaches in the
demonstration program region. (Class II, Priority Action) (A-95-
121).
Reference Material: (1) Technical Standard Order (TSO) C145a,
Airborne Navigation Sensors Using The Global Positioning System (GPS)
Augmented By The Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS); and (2) TSO
C146a, Stand-Alone Airborne Navigation Equipment Using The Global
Positioning System (GPS) Augmented By The Wide Area Augmentation System
(WAAS). Copies of these TSOs may be obtained from the FAA Internet Web
site at http://www.faa.gov/certification/aircraft/TSOA.htm.
Related Activity
The FAA is conducting a thorough review of its rules to ensure
consistency between the operating rules of 14 CFR and future RNAV
operations for the NAS. That rulemaking, when proposed and promulgated,
should enable the use of space-based navigation aid sensors for
aircraft RNAV systems through all phases of flight (departure, en
route, arrival, and approach) to enhance the safety and efficiency of
the NAS. The changes anticipated would result in greater flexibility in
air traffic routing, instrument approach procedure design, and airspace
use than is now possible with a ground-based navigation aid system
structure. The improved navigation accuracy and flexibility would
enhance both system capacity and overall flight safety, and would
promote the ``free flight'' concept in the NAS by enabling the NAS to
move away from reliance on ground-based NAVAIDs. This SFAR supports
this activity as an early implementation effort.
Contrary Provisions of the Current Regulations
People who conduct operations in Alaska in accordance with this
SFAR would be excepted from certain provisions of the FAA's
regulations. For instance:
14 CFR 71.75. Extent of Federal airways. The extent of Federal
airways is currently referenced as a center line that extends from one
navigational aid or intersection to another navigational aid or
intersection specified for that airway. This SFAR allows the Federal
airway and other routes published by the FAA to be referenced and
defined by one or more fixes that are contained in an RNAV system's
electronic database that is derived from GPS satellites and used by the
pilot to accurately fly the Federal airway or other published
[[Page 3780]]
routes without reference to the ground based navigational aids that
defines those routes.
14 CFR 91.181. Course to be flown. Section 91.181 defines courses
to be flown along Federal airways that are only referenced to station
referenced navigational aids or fixes defining that route. This SFAR
would allow courses to be flown on Federal airways and other published
routes that are defined by waypoints or fixes contained in a GPS WAAS
navigation system that is certified for IFR navigation.
14 CFR 91.205(d)(2). Powered civil aircraft with standard category
U.S. airworthiness certificates: Instrument and equipment requirements.
Section 91.205(d)(2) states that navigational equipment appropriate to
the ground facilities to be used is required for IFR operations and
does not include RNAV equipment. Under this SFAR, operations can be
conducted using navigation equipment that is not dependent on
navigating only to and from ground-based radio navigation stations.
14 CFR 91.711(c)(1)(ii) and 91.711(e). Special rules for foreign
civil aircraft. Section 91.711(c)(1)(ii) requires foreign civil
aircraft operating within the United States and conducting IFR
operations to be equipped with radio navigational equipment appropriate
to the navigational signals to be used and does not accommodate the use
of RNAV systems for instrument flight rules operations. Section
91.711(e) states that no person may operate a foreign civil aircraft
within the 50 states and the District of Columbia at or above flight
level (FL) 240 unless the aircraft is equipped with distance measuring
equipment (DME) capable of receiving and indicating distance
information from the VORTAC facilities to be used. Although an IFR
approved RNAV system provides distance information, this section does
not allow the use of an RNAV system in lieu of DME.
14 CFR 95.1. Applicability. Part 95 prescribes altitudes governing
the operation of aircraft under IFR on Federal airways, jet routes,
area navigation low or high routes, or other direct routes for which a
minimum enroute altitude (MEA) is designated. In addition, it
designates mountainous areas and changeover points. In general, the IFR
altitudes prescribed in this section are determined by a route analysis
based on the following factors: (1) An obstacle clearance assessment;
(2) the lowest altitude at which the aircraft radio navigation
receivers are able to receive the ground-based radio navigation fixes
defining the airway, segment or route; and (3) the lowest altitude at
which two-way voice communication between the aircraft and the air
traffic control unit can be maintained. No accommodation is made for
IFR altitudes determined by the above route analysis factors over
routes that may be defined by fixes other than ground-based navigation
aid fixes. Under this SFAR, operators using IFR certified GPS/WAAS RNAV
systems would be permitted to conduct operations over routes in Alaska
at the lowest minimum en route altitude based only on route obstacle
assessments and ATC two-way voice communication capability. This MEA is
defined as the ``special MEA'' for purposes of this SFAR to distinguish
it from MEAs established under part 95.
14 CFR 121.349(a). Radio equipment for operations under VFR over
routes not navigated by pilotage or for operations under IFR or over-
the-top. Section 121.349(a) requires airplanes to be equipped with two
independent radio navigation systems that are able to receive radio
navigational signals from all primary en route and approach
navigational facilities intended to be used. This section does not
allow, nor does any other section of part 121, allow the use of RNAV
GNSS for IFR navigation on Federal airways and other routes. This SFAR
allows the use of IFR-certified RNAV GPS/WASS systems for IFR
navigation.
14 CFR 125.203(b) and (c). Radio and navigational equipment. These
sections state that no person may operate an airplane over-the-top or
under IFR unless it has two independent receivers for navigation that
are able to receive radio signals from the ground facilities to be used
and which are capable of transmitting to, and receiving from, at any
place on the route to be flown, at least one ground facility. These
sections do not allow the use of RNAV GNSS for IFR navigation for any
airplanes conducting IFR operations under part 125 in the NAS. This
SFAR would allow for the use of IFR-certified RNAV GPS/WAAS systems for
IFR navigation.
14 CFR 129.17(a) and (b). Radio Equipment. Sections 129.17(a) and
(b) state that subject to the applicable laws and regulations governing
ownership and operation of radio equipment, each foreign air carrier
shall equip its aircraft with such radio equipment as is necessary to
properly use the air navigation facilities. This section does not
include or allow IFR RNAV GNSS to be used for air navigation on Federal
airways or other published routes. This SFAR would allow the use of
IFR-certified RNAV GPS/WAAS systems for air navigation on Federal
airways or other published routes.
14 CFR 135.165. Radio and navigational equipment: Extended
overwater or IFR operations. Section 135.165 excludes turbojet
airplanes with 10 or more passenger seats, multiengine airplanes in a
commuter operations, as defined under 14 CFR part 119, and other
aircraft from conducting IFR or extended overwater operations unless
they have a minimum of two independent receivers for navigation
appropriate to the facilities to be used that are capable of
transmitting to, and receiving from, at any place on the route to be
flown, at least one ground facility. Since IFR-certified RNAV GPS/WAAS
systems do not receive navigation position information from ground
facilities, they would not be acceptable for navigation based on this
section. This SFAR would allow the use of IFR-certified RNAV GPS/WAAS
systems in lieu of aircraft navigation equipment that is used to
navigate to and from ground-based navigation facilities.
Section-by-Section Discussion of the Proposal
SFAR No. 97--Special Operating Rules for the Conduct of Instrument
Flight Rules (IFR) Area Navigation (RNAV) Operations Using Global
Positioning Systems (GPS) in Alaska
Section 1. Purpose, use and limitations. The purpose of Section 1
is to define the specific GNSS equipment that is authorized for IFR
RNAV operations on Federal airways and other published routes in the
airspace in the state of Alaska. This section also states that the SFAR
can be used for U.S. and foreign operations conducted under part 91
over Alaska, as well as operations conducted by part 119 or part 125
certificate holders and part 129 operations specifications holders,
commercial, and certificated air carrier operators.
Section 2. Definitions and abbreviations. The purpose of Section 2
is to define specific terms that are used in this SFAR. These
definitions and abbreviations are specific to this SFAR. Some of these
definitions may not be defined or consistent with similar definitions
in the current Federal Aviation Regulations.
For the purposes of this SFAR, the definition of ``area navigation
(RNAV)'' is broadened by removing the words ``station-referenced
navigation signals,'' which refer to ground-based signals, and adding
the words ``flight path'' to cover operations in both the lateral and
vertical planes (i.e., lateral navigation (LNAV) and vertical
navigation (VNAV)).
[[Page 3781]]
To distinguish MEAs that are established by ground-based navigation
aids versus MEAs that are established outside the operational service
volume of ground-based navigation aids, the terms ``standard MEA'' and
``special MEA'' are included. As discussed earlier under 14 CFR part
95, the lowest altitude that an aircraft under IFR may be operated is
determined by, among other things, the lowest altitude at which the
aircraft radio navigation receivers are able to receive ground-based
radio navigation fixes defining the airway segment or route. For
purposes of this SFAR, this MEA is referenced as the ``standard MEA.''
Operators in Alaska using IFR certified GPS/WAAS RNAV systems (as set
forth in the definition of ``required navigation system''), however,
would be permitted to conduct operations over routes in or near Alaska
based on route obstacle assessments and ATC two-way voice communication
capability. This MEA may be lower than the ``standard MEA'' for
purposes of this SFAR.
Section 3. Operational requirements. The purpose of Section 3 is to
establish personnel training and qualifications, and GPS/WAAS
performance and signal requirements necessary for operational approval
to conduct IFR RNAV operations. This section allows operators subject
to this SFAR to operate over routes where the MEA for a route or route
segment is lower for GPS/WAAS IFR RNAV-equipped aircraft than the MEA
for operators equipped only with VOR navigation systems. This
flexibility would allow those GPS/WAAS IFR RNAV-equipped operators to
conduct operations at the lowest permissible altitude in an attempt to
avoid in-flight icing conditions.
Air carrier operators are required to establish training
curriculums that must be reviewed, validated, and approved by the FAA
prior to being authorized to conduct IFR RNAV operations for the en
route portion of flight at MEAs outside the service volume of ground-
based navigation aids under this SFAR. Title 14 CFR part 91 operators
also are required to receive training prior to conducting IFR RNAV
operations under this SFAR. The part 91 operator is responsible to
ensure this training is accomplished. Training programs may be provided
by the GPS WAAS avionics manufacturer/distributor. Training material
also may be obtained from the FAA Capstone Program Office in Anchorage
Alaska.
Section 3 also requires all operators to use authorized procedures
for normal, abnormal, and emergency situations unique to these
operations, including degraded navigation capabilities, and satellite
system outages. Detailed guidance material for these procedures will be
provided in the IFR regional supplemental (e.g., pre-flight planning
consideration of satellite outages, operational procedures for the loss
of RNAV during the operation).
Section 4. Equipment Requirements. The purpose of Section 4 is to
establish the minimum GPS/WAAS equipment requirements for IFR RNAV
operations. TSO C145a and TSO C146a GPS WAAS navigation systems are the
systems authorized to be used as the only means of navigation on
Federal airways and other published routes outside the operational
service volume of ground based navaids in Alaska. The MEA's for these
routes will be depicted on the published Low Altitude and High Altitude
En Route Charts and depicted as a MEA-G. For example, a GPS MEA of 4000
feet MSL would be depicted using a blue color as: 4000G.
Section 5. Expiration date. The purpose of Section 5 is to
establish the time period that this SFAR remains in effect. This SFAR
would remain in effect until cancelled or revised.
Parts 71, 95, 121, 125, 129, and 135--Amended
A note would be also added to parts 71, 95, 121, 125, 129, and 135
to cross reference SFAR No. 97, the full text of which would appear in
part 91.
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 are no current new information collection requirements associated
with this proposed rule.
International Compatibility
In keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on
International Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to comply with
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.
Economic Evaluation
Proposed changes to Federal regulations must undergo several
economic analyses. First, Executive Order 12866 directs each Federal
agency to 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 requires agencies
to analyze the economic impact of regulatory changes on small entities.
Third, the Trade Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 2531-2533) prohibits
agencies from setting standards that create unnecessary obstacles to
the foreign commerce of the United States. In developing U.S.
standards, the Trade Agreements Act requires agencies to consider
international standards, and, where appropriate, that they be the basis
for 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).
In conducting these analyses, the FAA determined that this proposed
rule: (1) Would generate benefits and not impose any costs, 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; (2) would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities; (3) would
not constitute a barrier to international trade, and does not impose an
unfunded mandate on state, local, or tribal governments, or on the
private sector.
For regulations with an expected minimal impact, the above-
specified analyses are not required. The Department of Transportation
Order DOT 2100.5 prescribes policies and procedures for simplification,
analysis, and review of regulations. If it is determined that the
expected impact is so minimal that the proposal does not warrant a full
evaluation, a statement to that effect and the basis for it is included
in proposed regulation. This proposed rule would allow the use of GSP/
WAAS for IFR RNAV procedures by locally based aircraft that are
equipped under the Alaska Capstone Phase II test and evaluation
program. Because there is no cost to the participants for the equipment
or training, the expected outcome is expected to have a minimal impact
on the flying public in Alaska. This proposed SFAR would also provide
the opportunity for other air carrier and general aviation operators to
voluntarily equip and train their personnel at their own expense. The
decision to incur these costs would be gauged against the safety and
efficiency benefits accruing
[[Page 3782]]
from IFR RNAV use of GPS/WAAS technology. The FAA requests comments
with supporting justification regarding the FAA determination of
minimal impact.
Regarding benefits, the adoption of this proposal would implement
the National Transportation Safety Board's recommendation ``to
demonstrate a low altitude instrument flight rules (IFR) system that
better fulfills the needs of Alaska's air transportation system.'' \1\
An interim assessment of the safety impact of Capstone Phase 1 test
program found that ``while the rates of accidents for specific causes
have not changed in a way that is statistically significant yet, the
over-all accident counts for the equipped and non-equipped groups were
different: 12 accidents for non-equipped versus 7 for equipped even
though each had nearly identical operations counts.'' \2\ In addition
to the anticipated safety benefits, the proposed rule might result in
cost savings. The use of IFR RNAV equipment permits the use of more
direct and therefore shorter routes, and aircraft using RNAV equipment
may require less fuel and time to reach their destinations. The FAA has
established a number of test routes throughout the United States and
some airlines have estimated annual cost savings in excess of $30
million dollars due to flying these advanced RNAV routes.\3\ The FAA
finds that the potential safety benefits and cost savings justify the
adoption of this proposed rule. The FAA seeks public comments regarding
these benefits and cost savings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Aviation Safety In Alaska (NTSB/SS-95/03) November 1995 page
77.
\2\ The Safety Impact of Capstone Phase 1 (W. Worth Kirkman,
Mitre) August 2002 page 15.
\3\ 2001 ACE Plan, Building Capacity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Determination
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) establishes ``as a
principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall endeavor,
consistent with the objective of the rule and of applicable statutes,
to fit regulatory and informational requirements to the scale of the
business, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions subject to
regulation.'' To achieve that principle, the RFA requires agencies to
solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain the
rationale for their actions. 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 proposed or
final rule would 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 proposed or final 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.
This proposed rule would establish the minimum equipment and
operational approval requirements that operators would have to comply
with to operate at lower MEAs that are outside the service volume of
ground-based navigation aids. Because operators are not required to
operate at these lower MEAs, those who voluntarily decide to do so
under this SFAR will have made their own business decisions that the
cost associated with this proposed SFAR's equipment and other
requirements are worth it. For example, some operators will have
concluded that flying at lower altitudes opens up markets that they
could not previously have served because currently they do not have
aircraft that can fly at certain altitudes on some routes and maintain
reception with ground-based navigation aids. Other operators will
conclude that having the ability to operate at lower MEAs will result
in fewer flight cancellations or delays due to adverse weather (e.g.,
icing at higher altitudes). Additionally, other operators will
recognize the safety benefit of having RNAV-equipped aircraft and
flightcrews trained under this SFAR when such flights encounter adverse
weather conditions en route at higher altitudes. Those operators will
have the safety benefit of being able to seek clearance to the lower
MEAs en route. It is anticipated that most of the participants who
volunteer to participate in Capstone Phase II will not incur any costs
to equip their aircraft or conduct required training; therefore, the
FAA certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small operators. The FAA seeks public
comments regarding this cost finding.
Trade Impact Assessment
The Trade Agreement Act of 1979 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 NPRM proposes to impose
requirements on foreign air carriers operating in the SFAR area if they
volunteer to participate in the test program. These requirements would
mirror the communication and navigation equipment requirements placed
on domestic carriers that volunteer to participate in the test program.
The FAA assessed the potential effect of this proposed rule and
determined that it would have a neutral impact on foreign trade and,
therefore, creates no obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United
States.
Unfunded Mandates Assessment
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (the Act) is intended,
among other things, to curb the practice of imposing unfunded Federal
mandates on State, local, and tribal governments. Title II of the Act
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) 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.''
This proposed rule does not contain such a mandate. The
requirements of title II do not apply.
Executive Order 13132, Federalism
The FAA has analyzed this proposed rule under the principles and
criteria of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. We determined that this
action would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national 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.
Regulations Affecting Interstate Aviation in Alaska
Section 1205 of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 1996 (110 Stat.
3213) requires the Administrator, when modifying regulations under
title 14 of the CFR that affect interstate aviation in Alaska, to
consider the extent to which Alaska is not served by transportation
modes other than aviation, and to establish such regulatory
distinctions as he or she considers appropriate. The FAA considers that
this rule will be
[[Page 3783]]
beneficial to operations in Alaska, but specifically solicits comments
on this issue.
Environmental Analysis
FAA Order 1050.1D defines FAA actions that may be categorically
excluded from preparation of a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
environmental impact statement. In accordance with FAA Order 1050.1D,
appendix 4, paragraph 4(j), this proposed rulemaking action qualifies
for a categorical exclusion.
Energy Impact
The energy impact of the notice has been assessed in accordance
with the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) Public Law 94-163,
as amended (42 U.S.C. 6362) and FAA Order 1053.1. We have determined
that the notice is not a major regulatory action under the provisions
of the EPCA.
List of Subjects
14 CFR Part 71
Airspace, Navigation (air).
14 CFR Part 91
Agriculture, Air traffic control, Aircraft, Airmen, Airports,
Aviation safety, Canada, Freight, Mexico, Noise control, Political
candidates, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
14 CFR Part 95
Air traffic control, Airspace, Alaska, Navigation (air), Puerto
Rico.
14 CFR Part 121
Air carriers, Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety, Charter flights,
Drug testing, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Safety,
Transportation.
14 CFR Part 125
Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
14 CFR Part 129
Air carriers, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security, Smoking.
14 CFR Part 135
Air taxis, Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
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 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, CLASS B, CLASS C, CLASS D, AND
CLASS E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIRWAYS; ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120, E.O. 10854, 24
FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.
2. Amend part 71 by adding a note to read as follows:
Note: For the text of SFAR No. 97, see part 91 of this chapter.
PART 91--GENERAL OPERATING AND FLIGHT RULES
3. The authority citation for part 91 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 1155, 40103, 40113, 40120, 44101,
44111, 44701, 44709, 44711, 44712, 44715, 44716, 44717, 44722,
46306, 46315, 46316, 46504, 46506-46507, 47122, 47508, 47528-47531,
articles 12 and 29 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation
(61 stat. 1180).
4. Amend part 91 by adding SFAR No. 97 to read as follows:
Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. 97--Special Operating Rules for
the Conduct of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) Area Navigation (RNAV)
Operations Using Global Positioning Systems (GPS) in Alaska
Those persons identified in Section 1 may conduct IFR en route RNAV
operations in the State of Alaska and its airspace on published air
traffic routes using TSO C145a/C146a navigation systems as the only
means of IFR navigation. Despite contrary provisions of parts 71, 91,
95, 121, 125, and 135 of this chapter, a person may operate aircraft in
accordance with this SFAR if the following requirements are met.
Section 1. Purpose, use, and limitations.
a. This SFAR permits TSO C145a/C146a GPS (RNAV) systems to be used
for IFR en route operations in the United States airspace over and near
Alaska (as set forth in paragraph c of this section) at Special Minimum
En Route Altitudes (MEA) which are outside the operational service
volume of ground-based navigation aids, if the aircraft operation also
meets the requirements of sections 3 and 4 of this SFAR.
b. Certificate holders and part 91 operators may operate aircraft
under this SFAR provided that they comply with the requirements of this
SFAR.
c. Operations conducted under this SFAR are limited to United
States Airspace within and near the State of Alaska as defined in the
following area description:
From 62[deg]00'00.000''N, Long. 141[deg]00'00.00''W.; to Lat.
59[deg]47'54.11''N., Long. 135[deg]28'38.34''W.; to Lat.
56[deg]00'04.11''N., Long. 130[deg]00'07.80''W.; to Lat.
54[deg]43'00.00''N., Long. 130[deg]37'00.00''W.; to Lat.
51[deg]24'00.00''N., Long. 167[deg]49'00.00''W.; to Lat.
50[deg]08'00.00''N., Long. 176[deg]34'00.00''W.; to Lat.
45[deg]42'00.00''N., Long. -162[deg]55'00.00''E.; to Lat.
50[deg]05'00.00''N., Long. -159[deg]00'00.00''E.; to Lat.
54[deg]00'00.00''N., Long. -169[deg]00'00.00''E.; to Lat.
60[deg]00'00.00''N., Long. -180[deg]00'00.00''E; to Lat.
65[deg]00'00.00''N., Long. 168[deg]58'23.00''W.; to Lat.
90[deg]00'00.00''N., Long. 00[deg]00'0.00''W.; to Lat.
62[deg]00'00.000''N, Long. 141[deg]00'00.00''W.
(d) No person may operate an aircraft under IFR during the en route
portion of flight below the standard MEA or at the special MEA unless
the operation is conducted in accordance with sections 3 and 4 of this
SFAR.
Section 2. Definitions and abbreviations. For the purposes of this
SFAR, the following definitions and abbreviations apply.
Area navigation (RNAV). RNAV is a method of navigation that permits
aircraft operations on any desired flight path.
Area navigation (RNAV) route. RNAV route is a published route based
on RNAV that can be used by suitably equipped aircraft.
Certificate holder. A certificate holder means a person holding a
certificate issued under part 119 or part 125 of this chapter or
holding operations specifications issued under part 129 of this
chapter.
Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS). GNSS is a world-wide
position and time determination system that uses satellite ranging
signals to determine user location. It encompasses all satellite
ranging technologies, including GPS and additional satellites.
Components of the GNSS include GPS, the Global Orbiting Navigation
Satellite System, and WAAS satellites.
Global Positioning System (GPS). GPS is a satellite-based radio
navigational, positioning, and time transfer system. The system
provides highly accurate position and velocity information and precise
time on a continuous global basis to properly equipped users.
Minimum crossing altitude (MCA). The minimum crossing altitude
(MCA) applies to the operation of an aircraft proceeding to a higher
minimum en route altitude when crossing specified fixes.
Required navigation system. Required navigation system means
navigation equipment that meets the performance
[[Page 3784]]
requirements of TSO C145a/C146a navigation systems certified for IFR en
route operations.
Route segment. Route segment is a portion of a route bounded on
each end by a fix or NAVAID.
Special MEA. Special MEA refers to the minimum en route altitudes,
using required navigation systems, on published routes outside the
operational service volume of ground-based navigation aids and are
depicted on the published Low Altitude and High Altitude En Route
Charts using the color blue and with the suffix ``G.'' For example, a
GPS MEA of 4000 feet MSL would be depicted using the color blue, as
4000G.
Standard MEA. Standard MEA refers to the minimum en route IFR
altitude on published routes that uses ground-based navigation aids and
are depicted on the published Low Altitude and High Altitude En Route
Charts using the color black.
Station referenced. Station referenced refers to radio navigational
aids or fixes that are referenced by ground based navigation facilities
such as VOR facilities.
Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS). WAAS is an augmentation to
GPS that calculates GPS integrity and correction data on the ground and
uses geo-stationary satellites to broadcast GPS integrity and
correction data to GPS/WAAS users and to provide ranging signals. It is
a safety critical system consisting of a ground network of reference
and integrity monitor data processing sites to assess current GPS
performance, as well as a space segment that broadcasts that assessment
to GNSS users to support en route through precision approach
navigation. Users of the system include all aircraft applying the WAAS
data and ranging signal.
Section 3. Operational Requirements.
To operate an aircraft under this SFAR, the following requirements
must be met:
a. Training and qualification for operations and maintenance
personnel on required navigation equipment used under this SFAR.
b. Use authorized procedures for normal, abnormal, and emergency
situations unique to these operations, including degraded navigation
capabilities, and satellite system outages.
c. For certificate holders, training of flight crewmembers and
other personnel authorized to exercise operational control on the use
of those procedures specified in paragraph b of this section.
d. Part 129 operators must have approval from the State of the
operator to conduct operations in accordance with this SFAR.
e. In order to operate under this SFAR, a certificate holder must
be authorized in operations specifications.
Section 4. Equipment Requirements.
a. The certificate holder must have properly installed,
certificated, and functional dual required navigation systems as
defined in section 2 of this SFAR for the en route operations covered
under this SFAR.
b. When the aircraft is being operated under part 91, the aircraft
must be equipped with at least one properly installed, certificated,
and functional required navigation system as defined in section 2 of
this SFAR for the en route operations covered under this SFAR.
Section 5. Expiration date.
This Special Federal Aviation Regulation will remain in effect
until rescinded.
PART 95--IFR ALTITUDES
5. The authority citation for part 95 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, and 14 CFR 11.49
(b)(2).
6. Amend part 95 by adding a note to read as follows:
Note: For the text of SFAR No. 97, see part 91 of this chapter.
PART 121--OPERATING REQUIREMENTS: DOMESTIC, FLAG, AND SUPPLEMENTAL
OPERATIONS
9. 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.
10. Amend part 121 by adding a note to read as follows:
Note: For the text of SFAR No. 97, see part 91 of this chapter.
PART 125--CERTIFICATION AND OPERATIONS: AIRPLANES HAVING A SEATING
CAPACITY OF 20 OR MORE PASSENGERS OR A MAXIMUM PAYLOAD CAPACITY OF
6,000 POUNDS OR MORE; AND RULES GOVERNING PERSONS ON BOARD SUCH
AIRCRAFT
11. The authority citation for part 125 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701-44702, 44705, 44710-
44711, 44713, 44716-44717, 44722.
12. Amend part 125 by adding a note to read as follows:
Note: For the text of SFAR No. 97, see part 91 of this chapter.
PART 129--OPERATIONS: FOREIGN AIR CARRIERS AND FOREIGN OPERATORS OF
U.S.-REGISTERED AIRCRAFT ENGAGED IN COMMON CARRIAGE
13. The authority citation for part 129 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40104-40105, 40113, 40119, 41706,
44701-44702, 44712, 44716-44717, 44722, 44901-44904, 44906.
14. Amend part 129 by adding a note to read as follows:
Note: For the text of SFAR No. 97, see part 91 of this chapter.
PART 135--OPERATIING REQUIREMENTS: COMMUTER AND ON DEMAND
OPERATIONS AND RULES GOVERNING PERSONS ON BOARD SUCH AIRCRAFT
15. The authority citation for part 135 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g) 41706, 44113, 44701-44702, 44705,
44709, 44711-44713, 44715-44717, 44722.
16. Amend part 135 by adding a note to read as follows:
Note: For the text of SFAR No. 97, see part 91 of this chapter.
Issued in Washington, DC on January 16, 2003.
James J. Ballough,
Director, Flight Standards Service.
[FR Doc. 03-1601 Filed 1-23-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P