[Federal Register: March 1, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 39)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 9885-9889]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr01mr05-17]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Parts 413, 415, and 417
[Docket No. FAA-2000-7953; Notice No. 05-02]
RIN 2120-AG37
Licensing and Safety Requirements for Launch
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Availability of draft regulatory language; Notice of public
meeting.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FAA is making available a draft of changes to the
commercial space transportation regulations governing licensing and
safety requirements for launch. We intend the changes to identify,
codify, and maintain the successful safety measures that have been
implemented at the federal launch ranges belonging to the Department of
Defense and NASA. We are also establishing clear safety requirements
for launches from non-federal launch sites. We will hold a public
meeting on March 29-31, 2005, to give stakeholders an opportunity to
get information about, and provide comments on, the draft regulatory
language.
DATES: Send your comments to reach us by May 2, 2005. The FAA will host
a facilitated public meeting in Washington, DC on March 29-31, 2005
from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m each day.
ADDRESSES: The public meeting will take place in the Discovery I
Conference Room of the Holiday Inn--Capitol at 550 C Street, SW.,
Washington, DC. Persons who are unable to attend the meeting and who
wish to file written comments may send comments identified by Docket
Number FAA-2000-7953 using any of the following methods:
DOT Docket Web site: Go to http://dms.dot.gov and follow the
instructions for sending your comments electronically.
Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov
and follow the instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, Room PL-401,
Washington, DC 20590-001.
Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
Hand Delivery: Room PL-401 on the plaza level of the Nassif
Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
For more information on the rulemaking process, see the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
Privacy: We will post all comments we receive, without change, to
http://dms.dot.gov, including any personal information you provide. For
more information, see the Privacy Act discussion in the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section of this document.
Docket: To read background documents or comments received, go to
http://dms.dot.gov at any time or to Room PL-401 on the plaza level of
the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Written comments to the docket will receive the same consideration as
statements made at the public meeting.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical information: Ren[eacute]
Rey, (202) 267-7538. For legal information: Laura Montgomery, (202)
267-3150. If you would like to present a statement at the public
meeting, have questions about the logistics of the meeting, or would
like to arrange an accommodation, contact Brenda Parker, (202) 267-3674
before March 15, 2005.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Licensing and Safety Requirements for Launch Amendments
The draft regulatory language includes changes to the commercial
space transportation regulations governing licensing and safety
requirements for launch. Some of the changes were originally part of a
notice of proposed rulemaking published in 2000 (65 FR 63921, Oct. 25,
2000) (2000 NPRM). Other changes were part of a supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking published in 2002 (67 FR 49456, July 30, 2002)
(2002 SNPRM).
The FAA revisited the issue of how much cost to attribute to the
draft rule. The FAA found there would potentially be certain costs
associated with FAA review of federal launch range implementation of
the proposed requirements. In an attempt to be responsive to industry's
concerns about costs, the FAA obtained an independent economic analysis
from Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC). SAIC's
analysis validated the FAA's estimates. Both reports are available in
the docket.
In preparing the draft regulatory language, we have also made
changes to the proposed language to clarify the FAA's position, respond
to comments,
[[Page 9886]]
or adopt range practice, including a reorganization of part 415 and
changes to various definitions. These changes are summarized below. A
matrix showing the correspondences between the FAA draft regulatory
language and Air Force requirements in EWR 127-1 and AFSPCMAN 91-710
can be found at http://ast.faa.gov/um/. This matrix should facilitate
the ability of interested parties to examine the commonality of
requirements among the three documents. Certain internal range
requirements, particularly in the area of flight safety analysis, will
not be found in either of the Air Force requirements documents, but in
internal Air Force handbooks. Those handbooks are not part of this
matrix.
Reorganization, Licensee Requirements Moved From Part 415 to Part 417
Part 415 contains requirements that an applicant must meet in order
to obtain a license and requirements that a licensee must comply with
during the term of the license. The draft regulatory language would
move all licensee requirements from part 415 to part 417, subpart A,
but would not change application requirements, except for the flight
readiness requirements of Sec. 415.37.
Definition of ``Equivalent Level of Safety''
The draft regulatory language defines ``equivalent level of
safety'' as ``an approximately equal level of safety that may be
determined by qualitative or quantitative means.'' The SNPRM proposed
defining ``equivalent level of safety'' as ``an approximately equal
level of safety. An equivalent level of safety may involve a change to
the level of expected risk that is not statistically or mathematically
significant as determined by qualitative or quantitative risk
analysis.'' In light of the comments received, the FAA excluded the
reference to risk. We did not want to create the impression that risk
is the only measure of safety, when equivalence may be determined
through quantitative or qualitative means.
Grandfathering of ``Meets Intent'' Certification and Waivers
The FAA's two proposals regarding grandfathering have been further
modified in response to industry concerns that the FAA was changing
current practice. With these changes, concerns over grandfathering
should no longer be an issue. The draft regulatory language differs
from the proposal in that a launch operator no longer has to be
licensed to be eligible for grandfathering a ``meets intent''
certification or waiver in Sec. 417.1(c). This change conforms to
Federal launch range practice. The FAA also now requires that a launch
operator, upon request, produce documentation of ``meets intent''
certifications or waivers to demonstrate compliance with the
requirements of part 417. The proposal would have only allowed licensed
launch operators to grandfather ``meets intent'' certifications or
waivers and, contrary to current practice, did not require
documentation.
New Performance Based Standard for Waterborne Vessel and Aircraft Risk
Limit in Sec. 417.107(b)(3) and (4)
In response to commenters' concerns, the FAA re-examined the
waterborne vessel and aircraft risk limit originally proposed in Sec.
417.107(b)(3) and (4). This re-examination focused on current range
practice. Based upon this re-examination, the draft regulatory language
makes the requirements more performance based and better reflects the
current practices of the Western and Eastern Range. Under the draft
regulatory language, a launch operator would implement waterborne
vessel hazard areas and aircraft hazard areas that provide an
equivalent level of safety to that provided by waterborne vessel hazard
areas and aircraft hazard areas implemented for launch from a Federal
range.
Addition of Sec. 417.107(e)(iii) To Protect Habitable Orbital Objects
Section 417.107(e) of the draft regulatory language would require a
launch operator to ensure that a launch vehicle, any jettisoned
components, and its payload do not pass any closer than 200 kilometers
to a habitable orbital object and to obtain a collision avoidance
analysis for each launch. The draft regulatory language includes new
subparagraph (iii) to protect habitable orbital objects during each
subsequent orbital maneuver or burn from initial park orbit, or direct
ascent to a higher interplanetary orbit, or until clear of all
habitable objects, whichever occurs first. This captures the current
practice for protection of habitable orbital objects at the Federal
ranges.
Addition of Sec. 417.111(i)(5)(iii), (iv), (v) Requiring Contact With
Local Authorities
The draft regulatory language modifies proposed Sec. 417.111 in
response to comments to require a launch operator to notify not only
the Coast Guard and FAA Air Traffic Control when conducting a launch,
as proposed, but also notifying any equivalent local authorities.
New Sec. 417.129, Safety at End of Launch
The draft regulatory language includes new Sec. 417.129, which
requires a launch operator to ensure no physical contact between the
vehicle and payload after separation, as well as making sure that
stored energy in the vehicle is depleted and thus not able to generate
debris.
Addition of ``Equivalent Level of Fidelity'' in Sec. 417.203(c)
The draft regulatory language modifies proposed Sec. 417.203(c) to
add the concept of ``equivalent level of fidelity'' for alternate
methods of analysis. This would require an operator to use accurate
data and scientific principles when making the case for an alternate
method of flight safety analysis. Use of an ``equivalent level of
fidelity'' instead of ``equivalent level of safety'' clarifies that
when a launch operator seeks to use an alternative method of flight
safety analysis, the launch operator would have to use accurate data
and scientific principles in doing so.
Addition of Sec. 417.218, Hold and Resume Gate Analysis
The draft regulatory language includes new Sec. 417.218, which may
permit a vehicle overflight or near overflight of a populated or
otherwise protected area during some portion of a launch. A launch
vehicle may perform overflight if a risk assessment is acceptable and
if a flight termination system will not be used to destroy a vehicle
while the vehicle is flying over the populated or protected area. A
launch operator would be responsible for identifying the periods of
time during vehicle flight in which use of a flight termination system
would be more detrimental to a populated or protected area than not
using such a system. Section 417.218 is an extension of the
``overflight gate analysis'' proposed in the 2000 NPRM and appears in
the draft regulatory language as Sec. 417.217. Section 417.217 would
require a launch operator to conduct a risk analysis and ``hold'' use
of a flight termination system once a vehicle passes a certain point or
``gate.'' Section 417.218 would extend this concept and define those
periods of time where a flight termination system must not be used.
Adopting Sec. 417.218 may expand the number of trajectories for
certain launch sites and potentially increase the number of inland
launch sites.
[[Page 9887]]
Elimination of a Five-Sigma Cross Range Bound About the Nominal Vehicle
Trajectory in Sec. 417.223
The draft regulatory language includes Sec. 417.223, which would
require a launch operator's flight hazard area analysis to establish
aircraft and ship hazard areas that encompass a three-sigma impact
dispersion area for each planned debris impact, instead of a five-sigma
standard as proposed in the 2000 NPRM. This change is in response to
comments and to adopt current range practice.
Change to Sec. 417.224, Probability of Failure Analysis
The draft regulatory language includes changes to Sec. 417.224,
which would require all flight safety analyses for a launch, regardless
of hazard or phase of flight, to account for launch vehicle failure
probability in a consistent manner. Section 417.224 also would require
that a launch vehicle failure probability estimate use accurate data,
scientific principles, and satisfy the principles of probability,
statistics, and mathematics.
Section A417.25(b)(5) in the 2002 SNPRM (proposed Sec.
417.227(b)(6)(i-iii) in the 2000 NPRM) would have required a launch
operator's debris risk analysis account for launch vehicle failure
probability using theoretical or actual launch vehicle flight data in
accordance with a specific prescribed method.
The FAA recognizes that there is more than one way to establish an
acceptable estimate of the probability of failure, especially for new
launch vehicles. A performance standard permits a launch operator to
employ these different methodologies so long as the methodologies
satisfy the performance standards for expendable launch vehicle
probability of failure analyses.
Addition of Sec. 417.301(d)
The draft regulatory language would add new paragraph (d) to Sec.
417.301 to clarify the flight safety system requirements for a licensed
launch from a Federal launch range or a non-Federal launch site. For
launch from a non-Federal launch site, compliance with the flight
safety system requirements is demonstrated through licensing. If a
Federal range oversees the safety of a licensed launch, the FAA will
accept the flight safety system without any demonstration of compliance
by the launch operator to the FAA with some necessary conditions, which
recognize that not all Federal ranges have experience conducting all
types of expendable launches. The FAA will accept a flight safety
system used by a Federal launch range if a launch operator has
contracted with a Federal launch range for the provision of flight
safety system services and property, and the FAA has assessed the range
and found that the range's systems and procedures satisfy the
requirements of this subpart. Paragraph (d) also discusses the
grandfathering provisions of Sec. 417.1(b).
New Version of Sec. 417.303(b)
The draft regulatory language modifies Sec. 417.303(b) to require
that a command control system and each subsystem, component, and part
that can affect the reliability of a component have written performance
specifications that demonstrate, and contain the details of, how each
satisfies the requirements of this section.
Rewrite of Appendix B to Part 417
The draft regulatory language includes a new appendix B to part 417
that incorporates current practice at Federal ranges. Appendix B
contains requirements that meet the public risk requirements for the
protection of ships and aircraft contained in Sec. 417.107. Appendix B
captures the current practice at the Federal ranges by requiring such
things as notifications, notices to airmen and mariners, and hazard
analysis for a launch site, downrange areas, ship, aircraft, and land
areas.
Changes to Wind Weighting Analysis of Sec. C417.5(c)
The draft regulatory language includes substantive changes to the
wind weighting analysis portion of Appendix C to part 417 from that
proposed in the 2000 NPRM. The changes relate to the measurement of
wind velocity and direction in Sec. C417.5(c). The draft regulatory
language would require that a launch operator measure wind velocity and
direction at altitude increments such that the maximum correction
between any two measurements does not exceed 5%. A launch operator
would still have to measure winds four times, but the required
altitudes would be different. Now, the maximum required altitude for
the first measurement would be that necessary to account for 99% of the
wind effect, instead of 90,000 feet. The maximum required altitude for
the second measurement would be that necessary to account for 95% of
the wind effect, instead of 50,000 feet. The maximum required altitude
for the third and fourth measurement would be that necessary to account
for 80% of the wind effect, instead of 5,000 feet. The draft regulatory
language also clarifies that the last measurement would be required
only to verify the third wind measurement data, not to set launcher
azimuth and elevation.
Change to Definition of ``Bright Band'' in Sec. G417.3
The draft regulatory language would define ``bright band'' in
Appendix G to part 417 as an enhancement of radar reflectivity caused
by frozen hydrometeors falling and beginning to melt at any altitude
where the temperature is 0 degrees Celsius or warmer. This recognizes
that there can be multiple altitudes where the temperature is 0 degrees
Celsius. Accordingly, there may be different altitudes where a bright
band may occur, and the original proposal incorrectly implied that
there could be only one.
New Definition of ``Cloud'' in Sec. G417.3
In response to comments, the draft regulatory language would define
``cloud'' as a visible mass of water droplets or ice crystals produced
by condensation of water vapor in the atmosphere.
Change to Definition of ``Electric Field Measurement at the Surface of
the Earth'' in Sec. G417.3
The draft regulatory language would change the definition of
``electric field measurement at the surface of the Earth'' to no longer
treat an interpolation based on electric field contours as a
measurement. Electric field contours would no longer be used for
electric field measurements.
Comments Invited
You may comment on the draft regulatory language by sending written
data, views, or arguments. We also invite comments relating to the
environmental, energy, federalism, or economic impact that might result
from adopting the draft regulatory language. Substantive comments
should be accompanied by cost estimates. The most helpful comments are
those that include a rationale or data. Comments must identify the
regulatory docket number and be sent to one of the addresses listed
above.
You may also present comments at the public meeting. The FAA will
prepare an agenda of speakers, which will be available at the meeting.
If we receive your request after the date specified above, your name
may not appear on the written agenda. To accommodate as many speakers
as possible, the amount of time allocated to each speaker may be less
than the amount of time requested. Persons
[[Page 9888]]
requiring audiovisual equipment should notify the FAA when requesting
to be placed on the agenda.
We will file in the docket all comments received, as well as a
report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel
concerning this draft regulatory language. 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 DOT Rules Dockets Office is on the plaza
level of the NASSIF Building at the Department of Transportation at the
above address. We will consider all comments received on or before the
closing date before taking action on the draft regulatory language. We
will consider late-filed comments to the extent practicable, and
consistent with statutory deadlines. We may change the draft regulatory
language in light of the comments we receive.
Commenters who file comments by mail may receive an acknowledgement
of receipt of their comments by including a pre-addressed, stamped
postcard with those comments on which the following statement is made:
``Comments to Docket No. FAA-2000-7953.'' The postcard will be date
stamped and mailed to the commenter.
Privacy Act
Using the search function of our docket web site, anyone can find
and read the comments received into any of our dockets, including the
name of the individual sending the comment (or signing the comment on
behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review
DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published
on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78) or you may visit http://dms.dot.gov.
Proprietary or Confidential Business Information
Do not file in the docket information that you consider to be
proprietary or confidential business information. Send or deliver this
information directly to the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document. You must mark the
information that you consider proprietary or confidential. If you send
the information on a disk or CD ROM, mark the outside of the disk or CD
ROM and also identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the
specific information that is proprietary or confidential.
Under 14 CFR 11.35(b), when we are aware of proprietary information
filed with a comment, we do not place it in the docket. We hold it in a
separate file to which the public does not have access, and place a
note in the docket that we have received it. If we receive a request to
examine or copy this information, we treat it as any other request
under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). We process such a
request under the DOT procedures found in 49 CFR part 7.
Public Meeting Procedures
The FAA will present a description of the draft regulatory language
at the public meeting. The FAA will use the following procedures to
facilitate the meeting:
(1) The meeting is designed to give interested parties an overview
of the contents of the draft regulatory language to facilitate the
public comment process. Therefore, the meeting will be informal and
non-adversarial. No individual will be subject to cross-examination by
any other participant; however, FAA representatives may ask questions
to clarify a statement and to ensure a complete and accurate record.
Participants will also have the opportunity to ask questions about the
draft regulatory language.
(2) There will be no admission fee or other charge to attend or to
participate in the meeting. The meeting will be open to all persons who
are scheduled to present statements or who register between 8:30 a.m.
and 9 a.m. on the day of the meeting. While we will make every effort
to accommodate all persons wishing to participate, admission will be
subject to availability of space in the meeting room. The meeting may
adjourn early if scheduled speakers complete their statements in less
time than is scheduled for the meeting.
(3) Speakers may be limited to a 10-minute statement. If possible,
we will notify speakers if additional time is available.
(4) We will try to accommodate all speakers. If the available time
does not permit this, we will generally schedule speakers on a first-
come-first-served basis. However, we reserve the right to exclude some
speakers if necessary to present a balance of viewpoints and issues.
(5) Sign and oral interpretation can be available at the meeting,
as well as an assistive listening device, if requested from the person
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section at least 2 weeks
before the meeting.
(6) Representatives of the FAA will chair the meeting. A panel of
FAA personnel involved in this proposal will be present.
(7) We will make a transcript of the meeting using a court
reporter. We will include in the public docket a transcript of the
meeting and any material accepted by the FAA representatives during the
meeting. Any person who is interested in buying a copy of the
transcript should contact the court reporter directly. Additional
transcript purchase information will be available at the meeting.
(8) The FAA will review and consider all material presented by
participants at the meeting. Position papers or material presenting
views or arguments related to the draft regulatory language may be
accepted at the discretion of the presiding officer and subsequently
placed in the public docket. We request that persons participating in
the meeting provide six copies of all materials presented for
distribution to the FAA representatives. You may provide other copies
to the audience at your discretion.
(9) Statements made by FAA representatives are intended to
facilitate discussion of the issues or to clarify issues. Any statement
made during the meeting by an FAA representative is not intended to be,
and should not be construed as, an official position of the FAA.
Meeting Agenda
Tuesday, March 29, 2005
Morning--Introductory Remarks and Presentation by FAA and United States
Air Force representatives
Afternoon--Licensing Requirements
--Grandfathering, Meets Intent Certifications, and Waivers
Wednesday, March 30, 2005
Morning--Cost Implications
Afternoon--Flight Safety Analysis/Flight Safety Systems
Thursday, March 31, 2005
Continue discussion of technical issues and other concerns.
Availability of the Draft Regulatory Language and Other Documents
You can get an electronic copy of the draft regulatory language,
the draft regulatory evaluation, a section-by-section response to
comments on the 2000 NPRM and the 2002 SNPRM, and the Independent
Economic Assessment performed by SAIC using the Internet through the
Department of Transportation Docket Management System at http://dms.dot.gov.
Use the search feature of the Web site by entering the
docket number for this rulemaking (7953). We have also established a
Web site containing a cross-referencing tool that correlates the text
of the draft regulatory language with Air Force launch requirements
[[Page 9889]]
documents. The Web address is http://ast.faa.gov/um/.
You can also get a copy of the draft regulatory language 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. Make sure to identify the docket number of this
rulemaking.
Issued in Washington, DC on February 23, 2005.
George C. Nield,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation.
[FR Doc. 05-3916 Filed 2-28-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P