[Federal Register: November 13, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 218)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 63797-63800]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr13no07-4]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 21
[Docket No. FAA-2006-25877; Amendment No. 21-91]
RIN 2120-AI78
Production and Airworthiness Approvals, Part Marking, and
Miscellaneous Proposals
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FAA is amending its requirements to allow the issuance of
export airworthiness approvals for Class II and III products located at
facilities outside the United States. The FAA proposed this change in a
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) issued on October 5, 2006. That
NPRM proposed comprehensive changes to 14 CFR part 21 to standardize
production and airworthiness requirements for production approval
holders. This final rule expedites the promulgation of a simple and
uncontroversial portion of that rulemaking. The FAA intends to issue a
separate final rule on other proposals in that NPRM.
DATES: This amendment becomes effective January 14, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical questions concerning
this final rule, contact John Linsenmeyer, Production Certification
Branch, AIR-220, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 493-5571; facsimile
(202) 267-5580, e-mail john.linsenmeyer@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Authority for This Rulemaking
Under the laws of the United States, the Department of
Transportation has the responsibility to develop transportation
policies and programs that contribute to providing fast, safe,
efficient, and convenient transportation (49 U.S.C. 101). The Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA or ``we'') is an agency of the Department.
The FAA has general authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety,
including minimum standards for appliances and for the design,
material, construction, quality of work, and performance of aircraft,
aircraft engines, and propellers (49 U.S.C. 106(g) and 44701). We may
also prescribe regulations in the interest of safety for registering
and identifying an aircraft engine, propeller, or appliance (49 U.S.C.
44104).
The FAA may issue, among other things, type certificates,
production certificates and airworthiness certificates (49 U.S.C.
44702). We issue a production certificate authorizing the production of
a duplicate of an aircraft, aircraft engine, propeller, or appliance
for which a type certificate has been issued when we find the duplicate
will conform to the certificate. We may include in a production
certificate terms required in the interest of safety. We issue an
airworthiness certificate for an aircraft when we find the aircraft
conforms to its type design and is in condition for safe operation. We
may include in an airworthiness certificate
[[Page 63798]]
terms required in the interest of safety (49 U.S.C. 44704).
This document adopts a change to our regulations governing the
certification procedures for products and parts. This change will make
it easier for manufacturers to produce and obtain aircraft parts in the
global marketplace, which should aid the efficiency and competitiveness
of the industry. For these reasons, this final rule is a reasonable and
necessary exercise of the FAA's rulemaking authority and obligations.
Background
On October 5, 2006, the FAA issued an NPRM to amend its
certification procedures and identification requirements for
aeronautical products and parts (71 FR 58914). Included in that NPRM
was a proposed change to Sec. 21.325(b)(3) to allow an export
airworthiness approval to be issued for a product or article located
outside of the U.S. if the FAA finds no undue burden in administering
its regulations (Emphasis added). One aspect of the proposed change was
to substitute the words ``product or article'' for ``Class II and III
products.'' This change was part of a comprehensive effort to
standardize terminology throughout part 21. Because the NPRM has not
yet been adopted, this final rule allows for the issuance of export
airworthiness approvals outside the U.S., but it retains the reference
to ``Class II and III products.''
Summary of Comments
The FAA received one comment on our proposed changes to the
regulations affecting export airworthiness approvals. The Aviation
Suppliers Association noted that the proposal still imposes an
obligation to apply to the FAA for the ``no undue burden'' analysis. In
the commenter's view, such an analysis is not necessary. Designated
Airworthiness Representatives (DARs) must already receive permission to
operate outside his or her geographic region. If the DAR has the
authority to operate and make findings outside the U.S., then the DAR
should also be permitted to issue an export airworthiness approval. An
``undue burden analysis'' would be duplicative and a waste of
Government resources. The commenter recommends removal of the ``undue
burden analysis.''
The FAA disagrees with the commenter. Pursuant to Title 49 of the
United States Code, the Administrator of the FAA may delegate to a
qualified private person a matter related to the examination, testing,
and inspection necessary to issue a certificate. However, these
assignees work on behalf of the Administrator. Ultimately, the FAA has
a statutory responsibility to inspect products and determine their
airworthiness status. We use the undue burden determination to ensure,
with FAA's limited resources, we can meet the requirements of Title 49;
our obligations under that statute cannot by circumvented by
application of a rule.
Discussion of the Final Rule
Part 21, Subpart L contains regulations for exporting aviation
products. This rulemaking amends the regulations governing how export
airworthiness approvals for Class II and III products are issued.
Export airworthiness approvals are used to identify the airworthiness
status of a particular product. Specifically, export airworthiness
approvals attest that a particular product conforms to the approved
design and is in a condition for safe operation. These approvals
provide a certain level of assurance that a product or part that has
been placed in the aviation stream of commerce poses a negligible risk
to the flying public. They serve both civil aviation authorities
approving the products for import and the end-user who places them into
service. Although export approvals are required only when requested by
the importing civil airworthiness authority, these documents have
become increasingly valued in the aviation industry. Products and parts
with an airworthiness approval have increased sales potential over
those same parts that do not have an approval.
This rulemaking amends Subpart L to allow the issuance of export
airworthiness approvals for Class II and III products, regardless of
their location. Previously, the rule only permitted approvals to be
issued for these products manufactured and located in the United
States.
When Sec. 21.325(b)(3) was adopted (30 FR 8465, Jul. 2, 1965), the
international market for aviation products was minimal compared with
today's international market. Additionally, FAA resources were limited
for issuing export airworthiness approvals outside the United States.
However, FAA designees are now available to issue export airworthiness
approvals for production approval holders (PAHs) and other exporters.
This rulemaking relieves the past restriction on issuing approvals, as
well as the public's burden of petitioning for exemptions, by allowing
export airworthiness approvals to be issued for any Class II or Class
III product located in another country, if the FAA finds no undue
burden in administering its requirements. Consequently, a PAH may
direct ship its products from a supplier facility without first
shipping the product to the United States to obtain an export
airworthiness approval.
Certificate management and designee oversight responsibilities are
examples of potential burdens on the FAA. For the PAHs, the assessment
of undue burden related to issuing an export airworthiness approval
would be performed during the FAA's undue burden assessment of a
prospective production facility located outside the United States. Part
of this assessment is a determination by the FAA that the PAH has
established and implemented supplier control procedures that are
acceptable to the FAA.
The FAA has granted many petitions for exemption to Sec.
21.325(b)(3), and this rulemaking will resolve the direct-ship issue
that prompted organizations to request them. Expediting this rulemaking
results in a more efficient disposition of those petitions for
exemption.
For the reasons stated above, this final rule adds new paragraph
Sec. 21.325(b)(4) which allows export airworthiness approvals to be
issued for Class II and III products located outside of the United
States if the FAA finds no undue burden in administering the applicable
requirements of Title 49 U.S.C. and subchapter C of Title 14 of the
Code of Federal Regulations.
Paperwork Reduction Act
Information collection requirements associated with this final rule
have been approved previously by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3507(d)), and have been assigned OMB Control Number 2120-0721.
An agency may not collect or sponsor the collection of information,
nor may it impose an information collection requirement unless it
displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
control number.
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 this final rule.
[[Page 63799]]
Regulatory Evaluation, Regulatory Flexibility Determination,
International Trade Impact Assessment, and Unfunded Mandates Assessment
Changes to Federal regulations must undergo several economic
analyses. First, Executive Order 12866 directs that each Federal agency
shall propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination
that the benefits of the intended regulation justify its costs. Second,
the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Public Law 96-354) requires
agencies to analyze the economic impact of regulatory changes on small
entities. Third, the Trade Agreements Act (Public Law 96-39) prohibits
agencies from setting standards that create unnecessary obstacles to
the foreign commerce of the United States. In developing U.S.
standards, this Trade Act requires agencies to consider international
standards and, where appropriate, that they be the basis of U.S.
standards. Fourth, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L.
104-4) requires agencies to prepare a written assessment of the costs,
benefits, and other effects of proposed or final rules that include a
Federal mandate likely to result in the expenditure by State, local, or
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100
million or more annually (adjusted for inflation with base year of
1995).
In conducting these analyses, FAA has determined that this final
rule: (1) Has benefits that justify its costs, (2) is not an
economically ``significant regulatory action'' as defined in section
3(f) of Executive Order 12866, (3) is not ``significant'' as defined in
DOT's Regulatory Policies and Procedures; (4) will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities;
(5) will not create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of
the United States; and (6) will not impose an unfunded mandate on
state, local, or tribal governments, or on the private sector by
exceeding the threshold identified above. These analyses are summarized
below.
Regulatory Evaluation Summary
This portion of the preamble summarizes the FAA's analysis of the
economic impact of this rule. It also includes summaries of the final
regulatory flexibility analysis, international trade impact assessment,
and the unfunded mandate assessment. For more information, we suggest
readers go to the full regulatory evaluation, a copy of which we have
placed in the docket for this rulemaking.
Total Costs and Benefits of This Rulemaking
This Regulatory Evaluation examines the impact of an FAA rule
allowing for the issuance of export airworthiness approvals for Class
II (major components) and Class III (parts and components) products
located at facilities outside the United States. Export airworthiness
approvals are required by the FAA only if required by the importing
country. Consequently, there is no issue of ``market failure'', at
least from the perspective of the United States.
As this rule relieves regulatory burden, there are cost-relieving
benefits and no costs. The FAA estimates the annual cost savings from
this rule to be $11,867,500. As the rule is a procedural change with no
front-loaded costs, we use a 10-year period of analysis. Discounting
this stream of annual cost savings (at 7%) for ten years yields a
present value of approximately $83 million.
Who Is Potentially Affected by This Rulemaking
This rule potentially affects directly all production approval
holders, including holders of Production Certificates, Technical
Standard Order Authorizations, and Parts Manufacturer Approvals. The
rule also potentially affects distributors, importers and exporters of
airplane parts, air operators and carriers, and the flying public.
Assumptions
This evaluation makes the following assumptions:
This rule would become effective on January 1, 2008.
The discount rate is 7 percent (Office of Management and
Budget, Circular A-94, ``Guidelines and Discount Rates for Benefit-Cost
Analysis of Federal Programs'', October 29, 1992, p. 8).
The period of analysis is the 10-year period, 2008-2017.
For purposes of discounting, cost savings are
conventionally assumed to occur at the end of the year. (If assumed to
occur at the beginning of the year, the discounted present value of the
cost savings increases by 7%.)
Changes From the NPRM to the Final Rule
The effective date of the rule changes from 18 months
after publication in the Federal Register to effective on January 1,
2008.
The period of analysis changes from 2009-2018 to 2008-
2017.
The base year changes from 2005 to 2008.
Benefits of This Rulemaking
The FAA estimates the present discounted value of the benefits of
this rule to be approximately $83 million.
Costs of This Rulemaking
As this rule relieves regulatory burden, there are no costs of this
rule.
Alternatives Considered
The Status Quo--The status quo represents a situation in which the
FAA would continue to issue exemptions from Sec. 21.325(b)(3)
indefinitely. As that would perpetuate ``rulemaking by exemption,'' we
choose not to continue with the status quo.
Final Regulatory Flexibility Determination
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) (RFA)
establishes ``as a principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall
endeavor, consistent with the objectives of the rule and of applicable
statutes, to fit regulatory and informational requirements to the scale
of the businesses, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions
subject to regulation. To achieve this principle, agencies are required
to solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain
the rationale for their actions to assure that such proposals are given
serious consideration.'' The RFA covers a wide-range of small entities,
including small businesses, not-for-profit organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions.
Agencies must perform a review to determine whether a rule will
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. If the agency determines that it will, the agency must
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis as described in the RFA.
However, if an agency determines that a rule is not expected to have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities,
section 605(b) of the RFA provides that the head of the agency may so
certify and a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required. The
certification must include a statement providing the factual basis for
this determination, and the reasoning should be clear.
The Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis of the rules proposed
in the NPRM found a significant economic impact on a substantial number
of small entities. This result was reported in the NPRM and the full
IRFA was placed in the docket (FAA-2006-25877), along with the Initial
Regulatory Analysis, and was also published in the Federal Register (72
FR 6968, February 14, 2007). This final rule, however, is cost
relieving and, therefore, imposes no
[[Page 63800]]
economic cost on small entities. Moreover, we did not receive any
comments regarding the small entity impact of this part of the NPRM.
Therefore as the Acting FAA Administrator, I certify that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
International Trade Impact Assessment
The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39) prohibits Federal
agencies from establishing any standards or engaging in related
activities that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of
the United States. Legitimate domestic objectives, such as safety, are
not considered unnecessary obstacles. The statute also requires
consideration of international standards and, where appropriate, that
they be the basis for U.S. standards. The FAA has assessed the
potential effect of this final rule and determined it would promote
international trade by reducing the cost of export airworthiness
approvals for Class II products (major components) and Class III
products (parts and components).
Unfunded Mandates Assessment
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-
4) requires each Federal agency to prepare a written statement
assessing the effects of any Federal mandate in a proposed or final
agency rule that may result in an expenditure of $100 million or more
(adjusted annually for inflation with the base year 1995) in any one
year by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by
the private sector; such a mandate is deemed to be a ``significant
regulatory action.'' The FAA currently uses an inflation-adjusted value
of $128.1 million.
This final rule does not contain such a mandate. The requirements
of Title II do not apply.
Executive Order 13132, Federalism
The FAA has analyzed this final rule under the principles and
criteria of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. We determined that this
action will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, or 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, does not have federalism implications.
Environmental Analysis
FAA Order 1050.1E identifies FAA actions that are categorically
excluded from preparation of an environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement under the National Environmental Policy
Act in the absence of extraordinary circumstances. The FAA has
determined this rulemaking action qualifies for the categorical
exclusion identified in paragraph 308(b) and involves no extraordinary
circumstances.
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use
The FAA has analyzed this final rule under Executive Order 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). We have determined that it is not
a ``significant energy action'' under the executive order because it is
not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866,
and it is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the
supply, distribution, or use of energy.
Availability of Rulemaking Documents
You can get an electronic copy of rulemaking documents using the
Internet by--
1. Searching the Federal eRulemaking portal at http://www.regulations.gov
;
2. Visiting the FAA's Regulations and Policies Web page at http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/
; or
3. Accessing the Government Printing Office's Web page at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html
.
You can also get a copy 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 amendment number or docket number of this
rulemaking.
Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted 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 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78) or you may visit
http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of
1996 requires FAA to comply with small entity requests for information
or advice about compliance with statutes and regulations within its
jurisdiction. If you are a small entity and you have a question
regarding this document, you may contact your local FAA official, or
the person listed under the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT heading at
the beginning of the preamble. You can find out more about SBREFA on
the Internet at http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/sbre_act/
.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 21
Aircraft, Certification procedures for products and parts, Export
airworthiness approvals.
The Amendment
0
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration
amends Chapter I of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 21--CERTIFICATION PROCEDURES FOR PRODUCTS AND PARTS
0
1. The authority citation for part 21 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7572; 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40105, 40113,
44701-44702, 44707, 44709, 44711, 44713, 44715, 45303.
0
2. Amend Sec. 21.325 by adding new paragraph (b)(4) to read as
follows:
Sec. 21.325 Export airworthiness approvals.
* * * * *
(b)* * *
(4) Class II and III products located outside of the United States
if the FAA finds no undue burden in administering the applicable
requirements of Title 49 U.S.C. and this subchapter.
* * * * *
Issued in Washington, DC, on November 6, 2007.
Robert A. Sturgell,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. E7-22111 Filed 11-9-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P