Aviation Safety Inspector Airport Access, 47824-47827 [E8-18804]
Download as PDF
47824
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 159 / Friday, August 15, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
periodical inspections, for the performance of
which it is required to use the hydraulic
power unit. This condition, if not corrected,
could result in a fire hazard.’’ The actions
specified in this AD are intended to prevent
this unsafe condition.
Actions and Compliance
(e) Within the next 10 hours time-inservice (TIS) or 3 months, whichever occurs
first, modify hydraulic systems 1 and 2
between the hydraulic blocks and the
hydraulic ground unit panel by
disconnecting the pipes, part number (P/N)
37.59.233.00.00 and P/N 37.59.234.00.00,
from the hydraulic blocks, plugging the
blocks and disconnected pipes, and securing
the pipes, as specified in section II, page 3,
´
of PZL-Swidnik S. A. (PZL) Mandatory
Bulletin No. BO–37–07–192, dated January
12, 2007.
(f) When the use of the hydraulic ground
unit panel is necessary for maintenance, for
the duration of the maintenance activity, you
may temporarily remove the security tape
and clips, unplug the pipes and blocks, and
reconnect the pipes that were disconnected
in accordance with paragraph (e) of this AD.
(g) At your discretion, modify both
hydraulic systems by replacing pipes, P/N
37.59.233.00.00 and P/N 37.59.234.00.00,
with pipes, P/N 37.59.333.00.00 and P/N
37.59.334.00.00, respectively, and install a
check valve, P/N 37.59.336.00.00, in each
hydraulic system in accordance with Section
II, page 2, of PZL Technical Bulletin No. BT–
37–07–196, dated April 24, 2007 (PZL TB).
Note: The PZL TB inconsistently refers to
various P/Ns as either ‘‘pipes’’ or ‘‘hoses.’’
For consistency in the terminology in this
AD, we refer to all these P/Ned ‘‘hoses’’ as
‘‘pipes.’’
(h) Modifying both hydraulic systems by
replacing the pipes and installing check
valves as specified in paragraph (g) of this
AD constitute terminating action for the
requirements of this AD.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Differences Between This AD and the MCAI
(i) This AD differs from the MCAI in that
it:
(1) Only applies to Model W–3A
helicopters because the Model W–3AS
helicopters do not have a U.S. type
certificate; and
(2) Does not allow compliance to be
completed in accordance with ‘‘later
approved revisions’’ of the service
information.
Other Information
(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs): The Manager, Safety Management
Group, FAA, ATTN: Uday Garadi, Aerospace
Engineer, Regulations and Policy Group,
FAA, Rotorcraft Directorate, Fort Worth,
Texas 76193–0110, telephone (817) 222–
5123, fax (817) 222–5961, has the authority
to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
Related Information
(k) MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA) Airworthiness Directive No. 2007–
0072R1, dated July 6, 2007 contains related
information.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:44 Aug 14, 2008
Jkt 214001
Air Transport Association of America (ATA)
Tracking Code
(l) ATA Code: 2910, Hydraulic System,
Main.
(m) You must use the specified portions of
´
PZL-Swidnik S. A. Mandatory Bulletin No.
BO–37–07–192, dated January 12, 2007, and
´
PZL-Swidnik S. A. Technical Bulletin No.
BT–37–07–196, dated April 24, 2007 to do
the actions required.
(1) The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference of
this service information under 5 U.S.C.
552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) For service information identified in
´
this AD, contact WSK ‘‘PZL-Swidnik’’ S.A.,
´
´
Al. Lotnikow Polskich 1, 21–045 Swidnik,
Poland, telephone (+48 81) 468 09 01, 751 20
71, or fax (+48 81) 468 09 19, 751 21 73, email: hem@pzl.swidnik.pl.
(3) You may review copies at the FAA,
Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest
Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort
Worth, Texas; or at the National Archives
and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call (202) 741–6030, or go
to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/
cfr/ibr-locations.html.
Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on August 7,
2008.
Mark R. Schilling,
Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E8–18805 Filed 8–14–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
For
technical questions concerning this final
rule contact Pat Hempen, Federal
Aviation Administration, Flight
Standards Service, Air Transportation
Division (AFS–200), 800 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591;
Telephone (202) 267–8166; facsimile
(202) 267–5229, e-mail
patrick.hempen@faa.gov. For legal
questions concerning this final rule
contact Bruce Glendening, Federal
Aviation Administration, Office of the
Chief Counsel, Regulations Division
(AGC–220), 800 Independence Avenue,
SW., Washington, DC 20591; Telephone
(202) 267–8011; facsimile (202) 267–
7971, e-mail bruce.glendening@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Authority for This Rulemaking
The FAA is issuing this rulemaking
under the authority set forth in 49
U.S.C. section 44701(a)(5), section
40113, and section 44713. Under section
44701(a)(5), the Administrator is
charged with promoting safe flight of
civil aircraft by, among other things,
prescribing regulations the
Administrator finds necessary for safety
in air commerce. Sections 40113 and
44713 relate to the Administrator’s
authority to conduct safety inspections.
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
Background
The FAA is re-codifying in Title 14 of
the Code of Federal Regulations, that
public-use airports are required to give
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
aviation safety inspectors (ASIs) access
to air operations areas (AOAs), security
identification display areas (SIDAs) and
other secured areas. Since the transfer of
most aviation and transportation
security functions to Transportation
Security Administration (TSA), ASIs
have encountered difficulty accessing
airport restricted areas to perform their
safety oversight duties. FAA ASIs must
have access to public-use airport
secured areas to do their job.
SUMMARY: Two rulemakings finalized
several years ago removed regulatory
language regarding the statutory
authority of Aviation Safety Inspectors
to access airport operations areas
(AOAs), security identification display
areas (SIDAs), and other secured and
restricted airport areas. This final rule
clarifies the authority of a properly
credentialed Aviation Safety Inspector
(ASI) to access AOAs, SIDAs, and other
secured areas of a public-use airport
allowing performance of their official
duties supporting the FAA’s safety
mission.
DATES: This amendment becomes
effective September 15, 2008.
Summary of the Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM)
On September 19, 2007, the FAA
published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) (72 FR 53504)
restoring, clarifying, and reiterating
authority of properly credentialed ASIs
to access AOAs, SIDAs, and other
secured areas of an airport. FAA
security rules were formerly contained
in 14 CFR parts 107 and 108. These
security rules were transferred to
Transportation Security Administration
(TSA) by the Aviation and
Transportation Security Act (ATSA)
(Pub. L. 107–71, 115 Stat. 597,
November 19, 2001) and promulgated
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 153
[Docket No.: FAA–2007–29237; Amendment
No. 153–1]
RIN 2120–AJ07
Aviation Safety Inspector Airport
Access
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\15AUR1.SGM
15AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 159 / Friday, August 15, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
TSA regulations found in 49 CFR parts
1542 and 1544.
The 30-day comment period ended on
October 19, 2007.
Discussion of the Final Rule
This final rule creates a new part 153
governing ASI access to public-use
airports and facilities to perform official
duties. The rule defines airport, and an
airport’s secured areas including the air
operations area (AOA), security
identification display area (SIDA), and
‘‘secured area.’’ It also defines an
aviation safety inspector (ASI) and FAA
Form 110, (FAA-issued credential
authorizing ASIs to perform inspections
and investigations). Lastly, the rule
details what access airports, aircraft
operators, aircraft owners, airport
tenants, and agencies must grant ASIs
bearing FAA Form 110A (and optionally
airport-issued identification media) to
perform inspections, test compliance, or
perform other duties as the FAA may
direct.
The FAA received 10 comments.
Seven comments were from individuals,
two from airports, and one from a labor
organization. Commenters generally
supported the final rule, but suggested
changes discussed below.
Six individual commenters supported
the rule. One commenter thought that
‘‘creating 14 CFR 153 is a very positive
thing for national security and aviation
safety, and as a tool, it will streamline
the aviation inspection process.’’
Another commenter offered that ‘‘the
main premise of the proposal is simply
a reinforcement of the existing powers
for inspection provided for Airport [sic]
ASIs, as agents of the FAA and also
creates legal basis for enforcement or
basis for litigation.’’ A third commenter
supported the proposed rule and stated
that ‘‘Inspectors must be permitted to
enter air operations and other secured
and controlled areas in order to perform
effective safety inspections.’’
The Air Line Pilots Association
(ALPA) strongly supported the proposed
rulemaking stating in part ‘‘We find the
statement and analysis of the problem
addressed by this proposal to be sound,
and the cost, methods of
implementation of changes, and
projected timeframe for completion of
changes to be reasonable.’’
Two airport operators submitted
comments on the proposed rule. The
commenter from Lambert-St. Louis
International Airport suggested the FAA
‘‘should make clear that any inspector
that needs access to the SIDA must have
identification approved by the airport
operator or escorted by a person with
escort privileges.’’ The second airport
commenter from the Houston Airport
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:44 Aug 14, 2008
Jkt 214001
System ‘‘agrees with the proposed rule
concerning access’’ but stated that ASIs
should comply with FAA and airport
requirements for movement within AOA
and that § 153.3 of the proposed rule
should be expanded to require
compliance with the Airport
Certification Manual, 14 CFR 139.303
and 329, and Advisory Circular 150/
5210 5b. The Houston Airport System
commenter further stated that at non139 airports, ASIs should comply with
requirements established by the airport
manager.
The comments from Lambert-St. Louis
International Airport and the Houston
Airport System raise important issues
concerning an ASI’s unrestricted airport
access to perform their Federally
mandated duties, an airport’s safety and
security program, and Transportation
Security Administration (TSA) security
procedures.
The FAA has established codes of
conduct for ASIs. ASIs must perform
their duty consistent with FAA rules
and regulations and airport safety rules
when in the AOA and secured areas. In
order to familiarize an ASI to airport
rules and procedures, the airport
operator may elect to issue SIDA badges
(with additional training that may
include airport layout review and safety
and security procedures). Consideration
of airport rules are expected when, for
example, an ASI makes an
unannounced inspection, he/she will
display their FAA Form 110A and
airport credentials (if issued)
establishing their inspection authority.
We will make all reasonable efforts for
local ASIs to have local airport
credentials and such identification
media should be displayed with the
FAA Form 110A. The FAA-issued Form
110A will continue to serve as a
standalone identification (allowing FAA
staffing flexibility to assign ASIs where
needed). The Form 110A will also
continue to be the primary credential
allowing ASIs unrestricted access to
those areas of an airport necessary to
perform their official duties supporting
our safety mission.
Additionally, when entering a sterile
area through a screening checkpoint,
FAA personnel will continue to comply
with TSA screening procedures.
While the FAA agrees that AOA safety
is of paramount importance, we do not
agree that additional rule language is
necessary to ensure ASIs carry out safe
practices. ASI safety practices are
reinforced by additional training and
adherence to best practices. Safety
practices are also contained in several
FAA orders including Orders 8000–38G
and 8900.1. (FAA orders, advisory
circulars, and other regulatory guidance
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
47825
can be accessed online at https://
rgl.faa.gov.) The airport operator also
has the option of conducting additional
training on their specific safety
procedures.
The FAA believes the new rule, with
our stringent ASI requirements, and
continued coordination and cooperation
with individual airport operators and
the local TSA will allow ASIs to
perform their official duties without
compromising airport safety or security.
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. We
have determined that there is no current
or new requirement for information
collection associated with this
amendment. None of the 10 received
comments addressed Paperwork
Reduction Act requirements or raised
concerns about additional paperwork
requirements if the final rule is
implemented.
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 these regulations.
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 (Pub. L. 96–354) requires
agencies to analyze the economic
impact of regulatory changes on small
entities. Third, the Trade Agreements
Act (Pub. L. 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
E:\FR\FM\15AUR1.SGM
15AUR1
47826
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 159 / Friday, August 15, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
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).
Executive Order 12866 and DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures
Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory
Planning and Review,’’ dated September
30, 1993 (58 FR 51736) directs the FAA
to assess both the costs and the benefits
of a regulatory change. We are not
allowed to propose or adopt a regulation
unless we make a reasoned
determination that the benefits of the
intended regulation justify the costs.
Our assessment of this rulemaking
indicates that its economic impact is
minimal because it does not impose any
costs on airport operators. Because the
costs and benefits of this action do not
make it a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’
as defined in the Order, we have not
prepared a ‘‘regulatory evaluation’’
which is the written cost/benefit
analysis ordinarily required for all
rulemaking under the DOT Regulatory
Policies and Procedures. We do not
need to do a full evaluation where the
economic impact of the rule is minimal.
Department of Transportation Order
DOT 2100.5 prescribes policies and
procedures for simplification, analysis,
and review of regulations. If the
expected cost impact is so minimal that
a proposed or final rule does not
warrant a full evaluation, this order
permits that a statement to that effect
and the basis for it be included in the
preamble if a full regulatory evaluation
of the cost and benefits is not prepared.
Such a determination has been made for
this final rule. The reasoning for this
determination follows:
After parts 107 and 108 were removed
and these authorities transferred to TSA
there has been some misunderstanding
about the continuing authority of FAA
safety inspectors to access various areas
of the airport that are controlled for
security purposes. This rule makes clear
that FAA aviation safety inspectors
continue to have authority to access
such areas as needed to perform their
duties.
This final rule will put the specific
regulatory authority into a new part 153
and clearly defines the authority of
properly credentialed ASIs to access
AOAs, secured areas, and SIDAs of a
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:44 Aug 14, 2008
Jkt 214001
public-use airport so they can perform
official duties in support of the FAA’s
safety mission. Adding this language
has a positive safety impact, because
properly credentialed ASIs will be able
to perform necessary inspections that
support the FAA’s safety mission. The
intended effect of this proposed rule is
to make sure ASIs have access to AOAs,
secured areas, and SIDAs of an airport
so they can perform official duties in
support of the FAA’s safety mission. Its
economic impact for airport operators is
minimal.
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-forprofit 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 rule clearly defines the authority
of properly credentialed ASIs to access
AOAs, secured areas, and SIDAs of an
airport to perform official duties in
support of the FAA’s safety mission.
Because this final rule only reiterates
and clarifies ASI authority to access an
airport’s secured areas, there will only
be minimal costs since some airports
will choose to issue SIDA badges as an
airport specific credential. When
airports issue SIDA badges for ASIs,
these will be carried in addition to the
FAA-issued Form 110A.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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
has determined that it will respond to
a domestic safety objective and is not
considered an unnecessary obstacle to
trade.
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
$136.1 million in lieu of $100 million.
This final rule does not contain such
a mandate. Therefore, the requirements
of Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 do not apply to this
regulation.
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.
E:\FR\FM\15AUR1.SGM
15AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 159 / Friday, August 15, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
out more about SBREFA on the Internet
at https://www.faa.gov/
regulations_policies/rulemaking/
sbre_act .
The FAA has determined this
rulemaking action qualifies for the
categorical exclusion identified in
paragraph 312f and involves no
extraordinary circumstances.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 153
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.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Availability of Rulemaking Documents
You can get an electronic copy of
rulemaking documents using the
Internet by:
1. Searching the Federal eRulemaking
Portal (https://www.regulations.gov);
2. Visiting the FAA’s Regulations and
Policies Web page at https://
www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/; or
3. Accessing the Government Printing
Office’s Web page at https://
www.gpoaccess.gov/.
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 https://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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:44 Aug 14, 2008
Jkt 214001
Airports, Aviation safety.
The Amendment
In consideration of the foregoing, the
Federal Aviation Administration
amends Chapter I of Title 14, Code of
Federal Regulations by adding part 153
to read as follows:
I
PART 153—AIRPORT OPERATIONS
Subpart A—Aviation Safety Inspector
Access
Sec.
153.1 Applicability.
153.3 Definitions.
153.5 Aviation safety inspector airport
access.
Subpart B—[Reserved]
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, and
44701.
Subpart A—Aviation Safety Inspector
Access
§ 153.1
Applicability.
This subpart prescribes requirements
governing Aviation Safety Inspector
access to public-use airports and
facilities to perform official duties.
§ 153.3
Definitions.
The following definitions apply in
this subpart:
Air Operations Area (AOA) means a
portion of an airport, specified in the
airport security program, in which
security measures specified in Title 49
of the Code of Federal Regulations are
carried out. This area includes aircraft
movement areas, aircraft parking areas,
loading ramps, and safety areas, for use
by aircraft regulated under 49 CFR parts
1542, 1544, and 1546, and any adjacent
areas (such as general aviation areas)
that are not separated by adequate
security systems, measures, or
procedures. This area does not include
the secured area.
Airport means any public-use airport,
including heliports, as defined in 49
U.S.C. 47102, including:
(1) A public airport; or
(2) A privately-owned airport used or
intended to be used for public purposes
that is—
(i) A reliever airport; or
(ii) Determined by the Secretary to
have at least 2,500 passenger boardings
each year and to receive scheduled
passenger aircraft service.
Aviation Safety Inspector means a
properly credentialed individual who
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
47827
bears FAA Form 110A and is authorized
under the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 40113
to perform inspections and
investigations.
FAA Form 110A means the
credentials issued to qualified Aviation
Safety Inspectors by the FAA for use in
the performance of official duties.
Secured area means a portion of an
airport, specified in the airport security
program, in which certain security
measures specified in Title 49 of the
Code of Federal Regulations are carried
out. This area is where aircraft operators
and foreign air carriers that have a
security program under 49 CFR part
1544 or part 1546 enplane and deplane
passengers and sort and load baggage
and any adjacent areas that are not
separated by adequate security systems,
measures, or procedures.
Security Identification Display Area
(SIDA) means a portion of an airport,
specified in the airport security
program, in which security measures
specified in Title 49 of the Code of
Federal Regulations are carried out. This
area includes the secured area and may
include other areas of the airport.
§ 153.5 Aviation safety inspector airport
access.
Airports, aircraft operators, aircraft
owners, airport tenants, and air agencies
must grant Aviation Safety Inspectors
bearing FAA Form 110A free and
uninterrupted access to public-use
airports and facilities, including AOAs,
SIDAs, and other secured and restricted
areas. Aviation Safety Inspectors
displaying FAA Form 110A do not
require access media or identification
media issued or approved by an airport
operator or aircraft operator in order to
inspect or test compliance, or perform
other such duties as the FAA may
direct.
Subpart B—[Reserved]
Issued in Washington, DC on August 4,
2008.
Robert A. Sturgell,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. E8–18804 Filed 8–14–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
E:\FR\FM\15AUR1.SGM
15AUR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 159 (Friday, August 15, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 47824-47827]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-18804]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 153
[Docket No.: FAA-2007-29237; Amendment No. 153-1]
RIN 2120-AJ07
Aviation Safety Inspector Airport Access
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Two rulemakings finalized several years ago removed regulatory
language regarding the statutory authority of Aviation Safety
Inspectors to access airport operations areas (AOAs), security
identification display areas (SIDAs), and other secured and restricted
airport areas. This final rule clarifies the authority of a properly
credentialed Aviation Safety Inspector (ASI) to access AOAs, SIDAs, and
other secured areas of a public-use airport allowing performance of
their official duties supporting the FAA's safety mission.
DATES: This amendment becomes effective September 15, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical questions concerning
this final rule contact Pat Hempen, Federal Aviation Administration,
Flight Standards Service, Air Transportation Division (AFS-200), 800
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; Telephone (202) 267-
8166; facsimile (202) 267-5229, e-mail patrick.hempen@faa.gov. For
legal questions concerning this final rule contact Bruce Glendening,
Federal Aviation Administration, Office of the Chief Counsel,
Regulations Division (AGC-220), 800 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20591; Telephone (202) 267-8011; facsimile (202) 267-
7971, e-mail bruce.glendening@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Authority for This Rulemaking
The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority set forth in
49 U.S.C. section 44701(a)(5), section 40113, and section 44713. Under
section 44701(a)(5), the Administrator is charged with promoting safe
flight of civil aircraft by, among other things, prescribing
regulations the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air
commerce. Sections 40113 and 44713 relate to the Administrator's
authority to conduct safety inspections.
Background
The FAA is re-codifying in Title 14 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, that public-use airports are required to give Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) aviation safety inspectors (ASIs) access
to air operations areas (AOAs), security identification display areas
(SIDAs) and other secured areas. Since the transfer of most aviation
and transportation security functions to Transportation Security
Administration (TSA), ASIs have encountered difficulty accessing
airport restricted areas to perform their safety oversight duties. FAA
ASIs must have access to public-use airport secured areas to do their
job.
Summary of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)
On September 19, 2007, the FAA published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) (72 FR 53504) restoring, clarifying, and reiterating
authority of properly credentialed ASIs to access AOAs, SIDAs, and
other secured areas of an airport. FAA security rules were formerly
contained in 14 CFR parts 107 and 108. These security rules were
transferred to Transportation Security Administration (TSA) by the
Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA) (Pub. L. 107-71, 115
Stat. 597, November 19, 2001) and promulgated
[[Page 47825]]
TSA regulations found in 49 CFR parts 1542 and 1544.
The 30-day comment period ended on October 19, 2007.
Discussion of the Final Rule
This final rule creates a new part 153 governing ASI access to
public-use airports and facilities to perform official duties. The rule
defines airport, and an airport's secured areas including the air
operations area (AOA), security identification display area (SIDA), and
``secured area.'' It also defines an aviation safety inspector (ASI)
and FAA Form 110, (FAA-issued credential authorizing ASIs to perform
inspections and investigations). Lastly, the rule details what access
airports, aircraft operators, aircraft owners, airport tenants, and
agencies must grant ASIs bearing FAA Form 110A (and optionally airport-
issued identification media) to perform inspections, test compliance,
or perform other duties as the FAA may direct.
The FAA received 10 comments. Seven comments were from individuals,
two from airports, and one from a labor organization. Commenters
generally supported the final rule, but suggested changes discussed
below.
Six individual commenters supported the rule. One commenter thought
that ``creating 14 CFR 153 is a very positive thing for national
security and aviation safety, and as a tool, it will streamline the
aviation inspection process.'' Another commenter offered that ``the
main premise of the proposal is simply a reinforcement of the existing
powers for inspection provided for Airport [sic] ASIs, as agents of the
FAA and also creates legal basis for enforcement or basis for
litigation.'' A third commenter supported the proposed rule and stated
that ``Inspectors must be permitted to enter air operations and other
secured and controlled areas in order to perform effective safety
inspections.''
The Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) strongly supported the
proposed rulemaking stating in part ``We find the statement and
analysis of the problem addressed by this proposal to be sound, and the
cost, methods of implementation of changes, and projected timeframe for
completion of changes to be reasonable.''
Two airport operators submitted comments on the proposed rule. The
commenter from Lambert-St. Louis International Airport suggested the
FAA ``should make clear that any inspector that needs access to the
SIDA must have identification approved by the airport operator or
escorted by a person with escort privileges.'' The second airport
commenter from the Houston Airport System ``agrees with the proposed
rule concerning access'' but stated that ASIs should comply with FAA
and airport requirements for movement within AOA and that Sec. 153.3
of the proposed rule should be expanded to require compliance with the
Airport Certification Manual, 14 CFR 139.303 and 329, and Advisory
Circular 150/5210 5b. The Houston Airport System commenter further
stated that at non-139 airports, ASIs should comply with requirements
established by the airport manager.
The comments from Lambert-St. Louis International Airport and the
Houston Airport System raise important issues concerning an ASI's
unrestricted airport access to perform their Federally mandated duties,
an airport's safety and security program, and Transportation Security
Administration (TSA) security procedures.
The FAA has established codes of conduct for ASIs. ASIs must
perform their duty consistent with FAA rules and regulations and
airport safety rules when in the AOA and secured areas. In order to
familiarize an ASI to airport rules and procedures, the airport
operator may elect to issue SIDA badges (with additional training that
may include airport layout review and safety and security procedures).
Consideration of airport rules are expected when, for example, an ASI
makes an unannounced inspection, he/she will display their FAA Form
110A and airport credentials (if issued) establishing their inspection
authority.
We will make all reasonable efforts for local ASIs to have local
airport credentials and such identification media should be displayed
with the FAA Form 110A. The FAA-issued Form 110A will continue to serve
as a standalone identification (allowing FAA staffing flexibility to
assign ASIs where needed). The Form 110A will also continue to be the
primary credential allowing ASIs unrestricted access to those areas of
an airport necessary to perform their official duties supporting our
safety mission.
Additionally, when entering a sterile area through a screening
checkpoint, FAA personnel will continue to comply with TSA screening
procedures.
While the FAA agrees that AOA safety is of paramount importance, we
do not agree that additional rule language is necessary to ensure ASIs
carry out safe practices. ASI safety practices are reinforced by
additional training and adherence to best practices. Safety practices
are also contained in several FAA orders including Orders 8000-38G and
8900.1. (FAA orders, advisory circulars, and other regulatory guidance
can be accessed online at https://rgl.faa.gov.) The airport operator
also has the option of conducting additional training on their specific
safety procedures.
The FAA believes the new rule, with our stringent ASI requirements,
and continued coordination and cooperation with individual airport
operators and the local TSA will allow ASIs to perform their official
duties without compromising airport safety or security.
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. We have determined that there
is no current or new requirement for information collection associated
with this amendment. None of the 10 received comments addressed
Paperwork Reduction Act requirements or raised concerns about
additional paperwork requirements if the final rule is implemented.
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 these regulations.
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 (Pub. L. 96-354) requires
agencies to analyze the economic impact of regulatory changes on small
entities. Third, the Trade Agreements Act (Pub. L. 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
[[Page 47826]]
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).
Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review,'' dated
September 30, 1993 (58 FR 51736) directs the FAA to assess both the
costs and the benefits of a regulatory change. We are not allowed to
propose or adopt a regulation unless we make a reasoned determination
that the benefits of the intended regulation justify the costs. Our
assessment of this rulemaking indicates that its economic impact is
minimal because it does not impose any costs on airport operators.
Because the costs and benefits of this action do not make it a
``significant regulatory action'' as defined in the Order, we have not
prepared a ``regulatory evaluation'' which is the written cost/benefit
analysis ordinarily required for all rulemaking under the DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures. We do not need to do a full
evaluation where the economic impact of the rule is minimal.
Department of Transportation Order DOT 2100.5 prescribes policies
and procedures for simplification, analysis, and review of regulations.
If the expected cost impact is so minimal that a proposed or final rule
does not warrant a full evaluation, this order permits that a statement
to that effect and the basis for it be included in the preamble if a
full regulatory evaluation of the cost and benefits is not prepared.
Such a determination has been made for this final rule. The reasoning
for this determination follows:
After parts 107 and 108 were removed and these authorities
transferred to TSA there has been some misunderstanding about the
continuing authority of FAA safety inspectors to access various areas
of the airport that are controlled for security purposes. This rule
makes clear that FAA aviation safety inspectors continue to have
authority to access such areas as needed to perform their duties.
This final rule will put the specific regulatory authority into a
new part 153 and clearly defines the authority of properly credentialed
ASIs to access AOAs, secured areas, and SIDAs of a public-use airport
so they can perform official duties in support of the FAA's safety
mission. Adding this language has a positive safety impact, because
properly credentialed ASIs will be able to perform necessary
inspections that support the FAA's safety mission. The intended effect
of this proposed rule is to make sure ASIs have access to AOAs, secured
areas, and SIDAs of an airport so they can perform official duties in
support of the FAA's safety mission. Its economic impact for airport
operators is minimal.
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 rule clearly defines the authority of properly credentialed
ASIs to access AOAs, secured areas, and SIDAs of an airport to perform
official duties in support of the FAA's safety mission. Because this
final rule only reiterates and clarifies ASI authority to access an
airport's secured areas, there will only be minimal costs since some
airports will choose to issue SIDA badges as an airport specific
credential. When airports issue SIDA badges for ASIs, these will be
carried in addition to the FAA-issued Form 110A.
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 has determined that it will
respond to a domestic safety objective and is not considered an
unnecessary obstacle to trade.
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 $136.1 million in lieu of $100 million.
This final rule does not contain such a mandate. Therefore, the
requirements of Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 do
not apply to this regulation.
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.
[[Page 47827]]
The FAA has determined this rulemaking action qualifies for the
categorical exclusion identified in paragraph 312f 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 (https://
www.regulations.gov);
2. Visiting the FAA's Regulations and Policies Web page at https://
www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/; or
3. Accessing the Government Printing Office's Web page at https://
www.gpoaccess.gov/.
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
https://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 https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/
sbre_act .
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 153
Airports, Aviation safety.
The Amendment
0
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration
amends Chapter I of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations by adding
part 153 to read as follows:
PART 153--AIRPORT OPERATIONS
Subpart A--Aviation Safety Inspector Access
Sec.
153.1 Applicability.
153.3 Definitions.
153.5 Aviation safety inspector airport access.
Subpart B--[Reserved]
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, and 44701.
Subpart A--Aviation Safety Inspector Access
Sec. 153.1 Applicability.
This subpart prescribes requirements governing Aviation Safety
Inspector access to public-use airports and facilities to perform
official duties.
Sec. 153.3 Definitions.
The following definitions apply in this subpart:
Air Operations Area (AOA) means a portion of an airport, specified
in the airport security program, in which security measures specified
in Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations are carried out. This
area includes aircraft movement areas, aircraft parking areas, loading
ramps, and safety areas, for use by aircraft regulated under 49 CFR
parts 1542, 1544, and 1546, and any adjacent areas (such as general
aviation areas) that are not separated by adequate security systems,
measures, or procedures. This area does not include the secured area.
Airport means any public-use airport, including heliports, as
defined in 49 U.S.C. 47102, including:
(1) A public airport; or
(2) A privately-owned airport used or intended to be used for
public purposes that is--
(i) A reliever airport; or
(ii) Determined by the Secretary to have at least 2,500 passenger
boardings each year and to receive scheduled passenger aircraft
service.
Aviation Safety Inspector means a properly credentialed individual
who bears FAA Form 110A and is authorized under the provisions of 49
U.S.C. 40113 to perform inspections and investigations.
FAA Form 110A means the credentials issued to qualified Aviation
Safety Inspectors by the FAA for use in the performance of official
duties.
Secured area means a portion of an airport, specified in the
airport security program, in which certain security measures specified
in Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations are carried out. This
area is where aircraft operators and foreign air carriers that have a
security program under 49 CFR part 1544 or part 1546 enplane and
deplane passengers and sort and load baggage and any adjacent areas
that are not separated by adequate security systems, measures, or
procedures.
Security Identification Display Area (SIDA) means a portion of an
airport, specified in the airport security program, in which security
measures specified in Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations are
carried out. This area includes the secured area and may include other
areas of the airport.
Sec. 153.5 Aviation safety inspector airport access.
Airports, aircraft operators, aircraft owners, airport tenants, and
air agencies must grant Aviation Safety Inspectors bearing FAA Form
110A free and uninterrupted access to public-use airports and
facilities, including AOAs, SIDAs, and other secured and restricted
areas. Aviation Safety Inspectors displaying FAA Form 110A do not
require access media or identification media issued or approved by an
airport operator or aircraft operator in order to inspect or test
compliance, or perform other such duties as the FAA may direct.
Subpart B--[Reserved]
Issued in Washington, DC on August 4, 2008.
Robert A. Sturgell,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. E8-18804 Filed 8-14-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P