The New York North Shore Helicopter Route, 29471-29474 [2010-12606]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 101 / Wednesday, May 26, 2010 / Proposed Rules
consider all comments we receive on or
before the closing date for comments.
We will consider comments filed after
the comment period has closed if it is
possible to do so without incurring
expense or delay. We may change this
proposal in light of the comments we
receive.
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 we 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.
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
Availability of Rulemaking Documents
You can get an electronic copy of
rulemaking documents using the
Internet by—Searching the Federal
eRulemaking Portal (https://
www.regulations.gov); Visiting the
FAA’s Regulations and Policies Web
page at: https://www.faa.gov/regulations_
policies or Accessing the Government
Printing Office’s Web page at: https://
www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/.
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 docket or notice number of
this rulemaking.
You may access all documents the
FAA considered in developing this
proposed rule, including economic
analyses and technical reports, from the
internet through the Federal
eRulemaking Portal referenced in
paragraph (1).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:16 May 25, 2010
Jkt 220001
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 91
Air traffic control, Aircraft, Airmen,
Airports, Aviation safety, Freight,
Afghanistan.
The Proposed Amendment
In consideration of the foregoing, the
Federal Aviation Administration
proposes to amend Chapter I of Title 14,
Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:
PART 91—GENERAL OPERATING AND
FLIGHT RULES
1. The authority citation for part 91
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 1155, 40103,
40113, 40120, 44101, 44111, 44701, 44709,
44711, 44712, 44715, 44716, 44717, 44722,
46306, 46315, 46316, 46504, 46506–46507,
47122, 47508, 47528–47531; articles 12 and
29 of the Convention on International Civil
Aviation (61 Stat. 1180).
2. In part 91, Special Federal Aviation
Regulation (SFAR) No. 110 is added to
read as follows:
Special Federal Aviation Regulation
No. 110—Prohibition Against Certain
Flights Within the Territory and
Airspace of Afghanistan
1. Applicability. This rule applies to
the following persons:
(a) All U.S. air carriers and U.S.
commercial operators;
(b) All persons exercising the
privileges of an airman certificate issued
by the FAA, except such persons
operating U.S.-registered aircraft for a
foreign air carrier; and
(c) All operators of U.S.-registered
aircraft, except where the operator of
such aircraft is a foreign air carrier.
2. Flight prohibition. Except as
provided below, or in paragraphs 3 and
4 of this SFAR, no person described in
paragraph 1 may conduct flight
operations within the territory and
airspace of Afghanistan below FL 160.
This rule permits U.S. civil aircraft
operations by persons described in
paragraph 1 below flight level (FL) 160
within the territory and airspace of
Afghanistan, only when approved by
the FAA as provided herein.
(a) Overflights of Afghanistan may be
conducted at or above FL 160 subject to
the approval of, and in accordance with
the conditions established by, the
appropriate authorities of Afghanistan.
(b) Flights departing from countries
adjacent to Afghanistan whose climb
performance will not permit operation
at or above FL 160 prior to entering
Afghan airspace may operate at altitudes
below FL 160 within Afghanistan to the
extent necessary to permit a climb above
FL 160, subject to the approval of, and
in accordance with the conditions
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
29471
established by, the appropriate
authorities of Afghanistan.
3. Permitted operations. This SFAR
does not prohibit persons described in
section 1 from conducting flight
operations within the territory and
airspace of Afghanistan below FL 160
when such operations are authorized
either by another agency of the United
States Government with the approval of
the FAA or by an exemption issued by
the Administrator.
4. Emergency situations. In an
emergency that requires immediate
decision and action for the safety of the
flight, the pilot in command of an
aircraft may deviate from this SFAR to
the extent required by that emergency.
Except for U.S. air carriers and
commercial operators that are subject to
the requirements of Title 14 CFR parts
119, 121, or 135, each person who
deviates from this rule must, within 10
days of the deviation, excluding
Saturdays, Sundays, and Federal
holidays, submit to the nearest FAA
Flight Standards District Office a
complete report of the operations of the
aircraft involved in the deviation,
including a description of the deviation
and the reasons for it.
5. Expiration. This Special Federal
Aviation Regulation will remain in
effect for 5 years from the effective date.
The FAA may amend, rescind, or extend
the SFAR as necessary.
Issued in Washington, DC, on May 21,
2010.
Raymond Towles,
Acting Director, Flight Standards Service,
Aviation Safety.
[FR Doc. 2010–12670 Filed 5–25–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 93
[Docket No. FAA–2010–0302; Notice No. 10–
08]
RIN 2120–AJ75
The New York North Shore Helicopter
Route
AGENCY: Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
SUMMARY: This proposed action would
require helicopter operators to use the
New York North Shore Route when
operating in that area of Long Island,
New York. The North Shore Route was
added to the New York Helicopter Route
E:\FR\FM\26MYP1.SGM
26MYP1
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
29472
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 101 / Wednesday, May 26, 2010 / Proposed Rules
Chart in 2008 and the use of that route
is currently voluntary. New York public
officials have continued to receive
complaints regarding the adverse impact
of helicopter noise on their
communities. The intended effect of this
proposal is to maximize utilization of
the existing route flown by helicopter
traffic along the north shore of Long
Island and reduce the noise impact on
nearby communities.
DATES: Send your comments on or
before June 25, 2010.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments
identified by Docket Number FAA–
2010–0302 using any of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and follow
the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
• Mail: Send comments to Docket
Operations, M–30; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Room W12–140, West
Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC
20590–0001.
• Hand Delivery or Courier: Take
comments to Docket Operations in
Room W12–140 of the West Building
Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between
9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
• Fax: Fax comments to Docket
Operations at 202–493–2251.
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 https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information you provide.
Using the search function of the docket
Web site, anyone can find and read the
electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets,
including the name of the individual
sending the comment (or signing the
comment for 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 https://DocketsInfo.dot.gov.
Docket: To read background
documents or comments received, go to
https://www.regulations.gov at any time
and follow the online instructions for
accessing the docket or Docket
Operations in Room W12–140 of the
West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington,
DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
technical questions concerning this
proposed rule contact Ellen Crum,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:16 May 25, 2010
Jkt 220001
Airspace and Rules Group, AJR–33,
Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202)
267–8783. For legal questions
concerning this proposed rule contact
Lorelei Peter, AGC–220, Office of Chief
Counsel, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone 202–267–3073.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Later in this preamble under the
Additional Information section, we
discuss how you can comment on this
proposal and how we will handle your
comments. Included in this discussion
is related information about the docket,
privacy, and the handling of proprietary
or confidential business information.
We also discuss how you can get a copy
of related rulemaking documents.
Authority for This Rulemaking
The FAA has broad authority and
responsibility to regulate the operation
of aircraft and the use of the navigable
airspace and to establish safety
standards for and regulate the
certification of airmen, aircraft, and air
carriers. (49 U.S.C. 40104 et seq.,
§ 40103(b). The FAA’s authority for this
proposed rule is contained in 49 U.S.C.
40103 and 44715. Under § 40103, the
Administrator of the FAA has authority
to ‘‘prescribe air traffic regulations on
the flight of aircraft (including
regulations on safe altitudes) for * * *
(B) protecting individuals and property
on the ground. (49 U.S.C. 40103(b)(2)).
In addition, § 44715(a), provides that to
‘‘relieve and protect the public health
and welfare from aircraft noise,’’ the
Administrator of the FAA, ‘‘as he deems
necessary, shall prescribe * * * (ii)
regulations to control and abate aircraft
noise * * *’’
Background
In response to numerous complaints
regarding helicopter noise received by
New York public officials, including
Senator Schumer and former Senator
Clinton, the FAA began working with
stakeholders and industry groups to
address the issue. Senator Charles
Schumer and Representative Tim
Bishop conducted a meeting in October
2007 with the FAA, local helicopter
operators and the airport proprietors to
specifically address the noise
complaints stemming from the north
shore of Long Island. As a result of this
meeting, a visual flight rules (VFR)
helicopter route, the North Shore route,
was designed for helicopters to use
when transiting the area in order to
lessen the noise impact on populated
areas by remaining offshore and over the
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
water. As this route was developed for
VFR flight, use of it is voluntary. The
route was published on the Helicopter
Route Chart for New York, effective May
8, 2008.
The Helicopter Route Chart program
was established by the FAA to enhance
helicopter access into, egress from, and
operation within high density traffic
areas by depicting discrete and/or
common use helicopter routes.
Guidance and procedures for this
program are contained in FAA Order
7210.3, Facility Operation and
Administration, Chapter 11. The use of
these routes is voluntary, unless air
traffic control assigns the charted routes
to pilots for purposes of addressing
traffic density or safety.
New York elected officials have
advised the FAA the noise complaints
continue in this area notwithstanding
the North Shore route. The local FAA
Flight Standards Division has also
received the same complaints.
The New York Long Island airspace,
like many other areas in the U.S.,
presents competing interests. The
geographic area is not vast but supports
a highly congested populated area that
is surrounded by traffic operating into
and out of LaGuardia Airport, John F.
Kennedy International Airport, Republic
Airport and a multitude of both public
and private heliports.
This proposed action would require
civil helicopters along Long Island, New
York’s northern shoreline to follow the
published New York North Shore Route
between the fixed waypoint VPLYD and
Orient Point. The FAA is aware that
several conditions may exist for which
helicopter operators would need to
deviate from the route. Therefore,
provisions are included that take into
consideration the wide variety of
helicopters, their associated
performance and mission profiles, the
dynamic weather environment along the
route, and the pilot’s responsibility to
maintain safe operations at all times.
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 new
information collection requirement
associated with this proposed rule.
International Compatibility
In keeping with U.S. obligations
under the Convention on International
Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to
conform to International Civil Aviation
Organization (ICAO) Standards and
Recommended Practices to the
E:\FR\FM\26MYP1.SGM
26MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 101 / Wednesday, May 26, 2010 / Proposed Rules
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
maximum extent practicable. The FAA
has determined that there are no ICAO
Standards and Recommended Practices
that correspond to these proposed
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, the 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).
This portion of the preamble
summarizes the FAA’s analysis of the
economic impacts of this proposed rule.
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 proposed rule. The reasoning for
this determination follows:
This proposed action is not expected
to result in additional costs on the
affected helicopters because those
operators that cannot comply with the
route as published due to operational
limitations, performance factors,
weather conditions or safety
considerations are allowed to deviate
from the provisions of Subpart H.
FAA has, therefore, determined that
this proposed rule is not a ‘‘significant
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:16 May 25, 2010
Jkt 220001
regulatory action’’ as defined in section
3(f) of Executive Order 12866, and is not
‘‘significant’’ as defined in DOT’s
Regulatory Policies and Procedures.
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.
This proposed rule would impact
several small entities. For aircraft
operators these include all firms with
less than 1,500 employees. There are 5
small entities in the New York market
for part 135 sightseeing helicopter tours.
However, the rule does not require the
purchase of additional equipment and
allows pilots to deviate from the
proposed provisions if necessary, due to
operational limitations of the helicopter,
performance factors, weather conditions
or safety considerations. Therefore the
rule imposes only minimal operating
cost.
Therefore, the FAA certifies that this
proposed rule would not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The FAA solicits comments regarding
this determination.
International Trade Impact Analysis
The Trade Agreements Act of 1979
(Pub. L. 96–39), as amended by the
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
29473
L. 103–465), prohibits Federal agencies
from establishing any standards or
engaging in related activities that create
unnecessary obstacles to the foreign
commerce of the United States.
Pursuant to these Acts, the
establishment of standards is not
considered an unnecessary obstacle to
the foreign commerce of the United
States, so long as the standards have a
legitimate domestic objective, such as
the protection of safety and do not
operate in a manner that excludes
imports that meet this objective. The
statute also requires consideration of
international standards and, where
appropriate, that they be the basis for
U.S. standards. As the proposed rule
would have only a domestic impact, the
Trade Agreement Act does not apply.
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 (in
1995 dollars) 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
$143.1 million in lieu of $100 million.
This proposed rule does not contain
such a mandate; therefore, the
requirements of Title II of the Act do not
apply.
Executive Order 13132, Federalism
The FAA has analyzed this proposed
rule under the principles and criteria of
Executive Order 13132, Federalism. We
determined that this action would not
have a substantial direct effect on the
States, on the relationship between the
national Government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, and, therefore,
would not have federalism implications.
Environmental Analysis
Under regulations issued by the
Council on Environmental Quality,
federal agencies are required to establish
procedures that, among other things,
identify agency actions that are
categorically excluded from the
requirement for an environmental
assessment or environmental impact
statement under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
because they do not have a significant
effect on the human environment. See
40 CFR 1507.3(b)(2)(ii), 1508.4. The
required agency procedures must also
E:\FR\FM\26MYP1.SGM
26MYP1
29474
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 101 / Wednesday, May 26, 2010 / Proposed Rules
‘‘provide for extraordinary
circumstances in which a normally
excluded action may have a significant
environmental effect.’’ 40 CFR 1508.4.
For FAA actions, these ‘‘categorical
exclusions’’ and ‘‘extraordinary
circumstances’’ are listed in Chapter 3 of
FAA Order 1050.1E, ‘‘Environmental
Impacts: Policies and Procedures.’’
The FAA has determined that this
proposed rulemaking action qualifies for
the categorical exclusion identified in
paragraph 312f of FAA Order 1050.1E.
That categorical exclusion applies to
‘‘[r]egulations, standards, and
exemptions (excluding those which if
implemented may cause a significant
impact on the human environment).’’
The existing New York North Shore
Route is a visual flight rules (VFR)
route, use of which is voluntary.
Additionally, the route is located
entirely over water and away from
noise-sensitive locations. Therefore,
implementation of this proposed rule is
not expected to result in significant
adverse impacts to the human
environment. Moreover,
implementation of the proposed rule
would not involve any of the
extraordinary circumstances listed in
Section 304 of FAA Order 1050.1E.
Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
The FAA has analyzed this NPRM
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.
Additional Information
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
Comments Invited
The FAA invites interested persons to
participate in this rulemaking by
submitting written comments, data, or
views. We also invite comments relating
to the economic, environmental, energy,
or federalism impacts that might result
from adopting the proposals in this
document. The most helpful comments
reference a specific portion of the
proposal, explain the reason for any
recommended change, and include
supporting data. To ensure the docket
does not contain duplicate comments,
please send only one copy of written
comments, or if you are filing comments
electronically, please submit your
comments only one time.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:16 May 25, 2010
Jkt 220001
We will file in the docket all
comments we receive, as well as a
report summarizing each substantive
public contact with FAA personnel
concerning this proposed rulemaking.
Before acting on this proposal, we will
consider all comments we receive on or
before the closing date for comments.
We will consider comments filed after
the comment period has closed if it is
possible to do so without incurring
expense or delay. We may change this
proposal in light of the comments we
receive.
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 we 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.
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/fr/.
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 docket or notice number of
this rulemaking.
You may access all documents the
FAA considered in developing this
proposed rule, including economic
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
analyses and technical reports, from the
Internet through the Federal
eRulemaking Portal referenced in
paragraph (1).
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 93
Air traffic control, Airspace,
Navigation (air).
The Proposed Amendment
In consideration of the foregoing, the
Federal Aviation Administration
proposes to amend Chapter I of Title 14,
Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:
PART 93—SPECIAL AIR TRAFFIC
RULES
1. The authority citation for part 93
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40106,
40109, 40113, 44502, 44514, 44701, 44719,
46301.
2. Amend part 93 by adding subpart
H to read as follows:
Subpart H—Mandatory Use of the New
York North Shore Helicopter Route
§ 93.101
Applicability.
§ 93.103
Helicopter operations.
Subpart H—Mandatory Use of the New
York North Shore Helicopter Route
§ 93.101
Applicability.
This subpart prescribes a special air
traffic rule for civil helicopters
operating VFR along the North Shore,
Long Island, New York.
§ 93.103
Helicopter operations.
(a) Unless otherwise authorized, each
person piloting a helicopter along Long
Island, New York’s northern shoreline
between the VPLYD waypoint and
Orient Point, shall utilize the North
Shore Helicopter route, as published.
(b) Pilots may deviate from the
requirements of paragraph (a) when
required for safety, weather conditions
or transitioning to or from a destination
or point of landing.
Issued in Washington, DC, on May 17,
2010.
Edie Parish,
Acting Director, Systems Operations,
Airspace and Aeronautical Information
Management.
[FR Doc. 2010–12606 Filed 5–25–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
E:\FR\FM\26MYP1.SGM
26MYP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 101 (Wednesday, May 26, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 29471-29474]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-12606]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 93
[Docket No. FAA-2010-0302; Notice No. 10-08]
RIN 2120-AJ75
The New York North Shore Helicopter Route
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This proposed action would require helicopter operators to use
the New York North Shore Route when operating in that area of Long
Island, New York. The North Shore Route was added to the New York
Helicopter Route
[[Page 29472]]
Chart in 2008 and the use of that route is currently voluntary. New
York public officials have continued to receive complaints regarding
the adverse impact of helicopter noise on their communities. The
intended effect of this proposal is to maximize utilization of the
existing route flown by helicopter traffic along the north shore of
Long Island and reduce the noise impact on nearby communities.
DATES: Send your comments on or before June 25, 2010.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments identified by Docket Number FAA-2010-
0302 using any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S.
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W12-
140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at 202-493-2251.
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
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. Using the search function of the docket Web site, anyone can
find and read the electronic form of all comments received into any of
our dockets, including the name of the individual sending the comment
(or signing the comment for 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 https://DocketsInfo.dot.gov.
Docket: To read background documents or comments received, go to
https://www.regulations.gov at any time and follow the online
instructions for accessing the docket or Docket Operations in Room W12-
140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical questions concerning
this proposed rule contact Ellen Crum, Airspace and Rules Group, AJR-
33, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 267-8783. For legal questions
concerning this proposed rule contact Lorelei Peter, AGC-220, Office of
Chief Counsel, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone 202-267-3073.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Later in this preamble under the Additional Information section, we
discuss how you can comment on this proposal and how we will handle
your comments. Included in this discussion is related information about
the docket, privacy, and the handling of proprietary or confidential
business information. We also discuss how you can get a copy of related
rulemaking documents.
Authority for This Rulemaking
The FAA has broad authority and responsibility to regulate the
operation of aircraft and the use of the navigable airspace and to
establish safety standards for and regulate the certification of
airmen, aircraft, and air carriers. (49 U.S.C. 40104 et seq., Sec.
40103(b). The FAA's authority for this proposed rule is contained in 49
U.S.C. 40103 and 44715. Under Sec. 40103, the Administrator of the FAA
has authority to ``prescribe air traffic regulations on the flight of
aircraft (including regulations on safe altitudes) for * * * (B)
protecting individuals and property on the ground. (49 U.S.C.
40103(b)(2)). In addition, Sec. 44715(a), provides that to ``relieve
and protect the public health and welfare from aircraft noise,'' the
Administrator of the FAA, ``as he deems necessary, shall prescribe * *
* (ii) regulations to control and abate aircraft noise * * *''
Background
In response to numerous complaints regarding helicopter noise
received by New York public officials, including Senator Schumer and
former Senator Clinton, the FAA began working with stakeholders and
industry groups to address the issue. Senator Charles Schumer and
Representative Tim Bishop conducted a meeting in October 2007 with the
FAA, local helicopter operators and the airport proprietors to
specifically address the noise complaints stemming from the north shore
of Long Island. As a result of this meeting, a visual flight rules
(VFR) helicopter route, the North Shore route, was designed for
helicopters to use when transiting the area in order to lessen the
noise impact on populated areas by remaining offshore and over the
water. As this route was developed for VFR flight, use of it is
voluntary. The route was published on the Helicopter Route Chart for
New York, effective May 8, 2008.
The Helicopter Route Chart program was established by the FAA to
enhance helicopter access into, egress from, and operation within high
density traffic areas by depicting discrete and/or common use
helicopter routes. Guidance and procedures for this program are
contained in FAA Order 7210.3, Facility Operation and Administration,
Chapter 11. The use of these routes is voluntary, unless air traffic
control assigns the charted routes to pilots for purposes of addressing
traffic density or safety.
New York elected officials have advised the FAA the noise
complaints continue in this area notwithstanding the North Shore route.
The local FAA Flight Standards Division has also received the same
complaints.
The New York Long Island airspace, like many other areas in the
U.S., presents competing interests. The geographic area is not vast but
supports a highly congested populated area that is surrounded by
traffic operating into and out of LaGuardia Airport, John F. Kennedy
International Airport, Republic Airport and a multitude of both public
and private heliports.
This proposed action would require civil helicopters along Long
Island, New York's northern shoreline to follow the published New York
North Shore Route between the fixed waypoint VPLYD and Orient Point.
The FAA is aware that several conditions may exist for which helicopter
operators would need to deviate from the route. Therefore, provisions
are included that take into consideration the wide variety of
helicopters, their associated performance and mission profiles, the
dynamic weather environment along the route, and the pilot's
responsibility to maintain safe operations at all times.
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 new information collection requirement associated with this
proposed rule.
International Compatibility
In keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on
International Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to conform to
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards and
Recommended Practices to the
[[Page 29473]]
maximum extent practicable. The FAA has determined that there are no
ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices that correspond to these
proposed 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, the 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). This portion of the preamble summarizes the FAA's analysis of
the economic impacts of this proposed rule.
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 proposed rule. The
reasoning for this determination follows:
This proposed action is not expected to result in additional costs
on the affected helicopters because those operators that cannot comply
with the route as published due to operational limitations, performance
factors, weather conditions or safety considerations are allowed to
deviate from the provisions of Subpart H.
FAA has, therefore, determined that this proposed rule is not a
``significant regulatory action'' as defined in section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866, and is not ``significant'' as defined in DOT's
Regulatory Policies and Procedures.
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.
This proposed rule would impact several small entities. For
aircraft operators these include all firms with less than 1,500
employees. There are 5 small entities in the New York market for part
135 sightseeing helicopter tours. However, the rule does not require
the purchase of additional equipment and allows pilots to deviate from
the proposed provisions if necessary, due to operational limitations of
the helicopter, performance factors, weather conditions or safety
considerations. Therefore the rule imposes only minimal operating cost.
Therefore, the FAA certifies that this proposed rule would not have
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The FAA solicits comments regarding this determination.
International Trade Impact Analysis
The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39), as amended by the
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. L. 103-465), prohibits Federal
agencies from establishing any standards or engaging in related
activities that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of
the United States. Pursuant to these Acts, the establishment of
standards is not considered an unnecessary obstacle to the foreign
commerce of the United States, so long as the standards have a
legitimate domestic objective, such as the protection of safety and do
not operate in a manner that excludes imports that meet this objective.
The statute also requires consideration of international standards and,
where appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. standards. As the
proposed rule would have only a domestic impact, the Trade Agreement
Act does not apply.
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
(in 1995 dollars) 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 $143.1 million in lieu of $100
million. This proposed rule does not contain such a mandate; therefore,
the requirements of Title II of the Act do not apply.
Executive Order 13132, Federalism
The FAA has analyzed this proposed rule under the principles and
criteria of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. We determined that this
action would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government, and, therefore, would not have federalism implications.
Environmental Analysis
Under regulations issued by the Council on Environmental Quality,
federal agencies are required to establish procedures that, among other
things, identify agency actions that are categorically excluded from
the requirement for an environmental assessment or environmental impact
statement under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 because
they do not have a significant effect on the human environment. See 40
CFR 1507.3(b)(2)(ii), 1508.4. The required agency procedures must also
[[Page 29474]]
``provide for extraordinary circumstances in which a normally excluded
action may have a significant environmental effect.'' 40 CFR 1508.4.
For FAA actions, these ``categorical exclusions'' and ``extraordinary
circumstances'' are listed in Chapter 3 of FAA Order 1050.1E,
``Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures.''
The FAA has determined that this proposed rulemaking action
qualifies for the categorical exclusion identified in paragraph 312f of
FAA Order 1050.1E. That categorical exclusion applies to
``[r]egulations, standards, and exemptions (excluding those which if
implemented may cause a significant impact on the human environment).''
The existing New York North Shore Route is a visual flight rules (VFR)
route, use of which is voluntary. Additionally, the route is located
entirely over water and away from noise-sensitive locations. Therefore,
implementation of this proposed rule is not expected to result in
significant adverse impacts to the human environment. Moreover,
implementation of the proposed rule would not involve any of the
extraordinary circumstances listed in Section 304 of FAA Order 1050.1E.
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use
The FAA has analyzed this NPRM 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.
Additional Information
Comments Invited
The FAA invites interested persons to participate in this
rulemaking by submitting written comments, data, or views. We also
invite comments relating to the economic, environmental, energy, or
federalism impacts that might result from adopting the proposals in
this document. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion
of the proposal, explain the reason for any recommended change, and
include supporting data. To ensure the docket does not contain
duplicate comments, please send only one copy of written comments, or
if you are filing comments electronically, please submit your comments
only one time.
We will file in the docket all comments we receive, as well as a
report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel
concerning this proposed rulemaking. Before acting on this proposal, we
will consider all comments we receive on or before the closing date for
comments. We will consider comments filed after the comment period has
closed if it is possible to do so without incurring expense or delay.
We may change this proposal in light of the comments we receive.
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 we 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.
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/fr/.
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 docket or notice number of this rulemaking.
You may access all documents the FAA considered in developing this
proposed rule, including economic analyses and technical reports, from
the Internet through the Federal eRulemaking Portal referenced in
paragraph (1).
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 93
Air traffic control, Airspace, Navigation (air).
The Proposed Amendment
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend Chapter I of Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations, as follows:
PART 93--SPECIAL AIR TRAFFIC RULES
1. The authority citation for part 93 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40109, 40113, 44502,
44514, 44701, 44719, 46301.
2. Amend part 93 by adding subpart H to read as follows:
Subpart H--Mandatory Use of the New York North Shore Helicopter
Route
Sec. 93.101 Applicability.
Sec. 93.103 Helicopter operations.
Subpart H--Mandatory Use of the New York North Shore Helicopter
Route
Sec. 93.101 Applicability.
This subpart prescribes a special air traffic rule for civil
helicopters operating VFR along the North Shore, Long Island, New York.
Sec. 93.103 Helicopter operations.
(a) Unless otherwise authorized, each person piloting a helicopter
along Long Island, New York's northern shoreline between the VPLYD
waypoint and Orient Point, shall utilize the North Shore Helicopter
route, as published.
(b) Pilots may deviate from the requirements of paragraph (a) when
required for safety, weather conditions or transitioning to or from a
destination or point of landing.
Issued in Washington, DC, on May 17, 2010.
Edie Parish,
Acting Director, Systems Operations, Airspace and Aeronautical
Information Management.
[FR Doc. 2010-12606 Filed 5-25-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
