Rotorcraft Pilot Compartment View, 9419-9423 [2018-04547]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
9419
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
Vol. 83, No. 44
Tuesday, March 6, 2018
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains regulatory documents having general
applicability and legal effect, most of which
are keyed to and codified in the Code of
Federal Regulations, which is published under
50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
an appeal of denial of access to Board
records under the Freedom of
Information Act, the Privacy Act, and
the Board’s rules regarding such access,
and to delete the existing delegation of
authority to individual Board members.
PART 265—RULES REGARDING
DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by
the Superintendent of Documents.
II. Regulatory Analysis
§ 265.4
These amendments relate solely to the
agency’s organization, procedure, or
practice. Accordingly, the provisions of
the Administrative Procedure Act
regarding notice of proposed rulemaking
and opportunity for public participation
are not applicable.2
Because no notice of proposed
rulemaking is required to be issued, or
has been issued, in connection with this
rule, it is not a ‘‘rule’’ for purposes of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act, and that
act, therefore, does not apply.3
These amendments do not contain
any collection of information
requirements as defined by the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, as
amended.4
Section 722 of the Gramm-LeachBliley Act 5 requires the Federal banking
agencies to use plain language in all
proposed and final rules published after
January 1, 2000. The Board has sought
to present this rule in a simple and
straightforward manner.
The rule is not a ‘‘substantive rule’’
for the purposes of the effective-date
provision of the Administrative
Procedure Act; as such, the act does not
require the Board to delay the effective
date of the rule.6 Accordingly, the
amendments are effective March 6,
2018.
■
■
■
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
12 CFR Part 265
[Docket No. R–1600]
RIN 7100 AE99
Rules Regarding Delegation of
Authority: Delegation of Authority to
the Secretary of the Board
Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System (Board).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Board is amending its
rules regarding delegation of authority
to delegate to the Secretary of the Board
the authority to review and determine
an appeal of denial of access to Board
records under the Freedom of
Information Act, the Privacy Act, and
the Board’s rules regarding such access.
DATES: Effective March 6, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Brian Phillips, Attorney, (202) 452–
3321, Legal Division, Board of
Governors of the Federal Reserve
System, 20th and C Streets NW,
Washington, DC 20551. For the hearing
impaired only, Telecommunications
Device for the Deaf (TDD) users may
contact (202) 263–4869.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
I. Discussion
The Board previously adopted a rule
delegating to any member of the Board,
as designated by the Chairman, the
authority to ‘‘review and determine an
appeal of denial of access to Board
records under the Freedom of
Information Act, the Privacy Act, and
the Board’s rules regarding such
access.’’ 1 The Board has determined
that the Secretary of the Board is
capable of acting on such requests.
Accordingly, the Board is amending its
rules regarding delegation of authority
to delegate to the Secretary of the Board
the authority to review and determine
1 12
CFR 265.4(a)(1) (internal citations omitted).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:02 Mar 05, 2018
Jkt 244001
List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 265
1. The authority citation for part 265
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 248(i) and (k).
[Amended]
2. In § 265.4:
a. Remove paragraph (a)(1); and
b. Redesignate paragraphs (a)(2)
through (4) as paragraphs (a)(1) through
(3).
■ 3. In § 265.5:
■ a. Revise the introductory text;
■ b. Redesignate paragraphs (b)(2) and
(3) as paragraphs (b)(3) and (4); and
■ c. Add new paragraph (b)(2)
The revisions and additions read as
follows:
§ 265.5 Functions delegated to Secretary
of the Board.
The Secretary of the Board (or the
Secretary’s delegee) is authorized:
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(2) Review of denial of access to
Board records; FOIA. To review and
determine an appeal of denial of access
to Board records under the Freedom of
Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552), the
Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a), and the
Board’s rules regarding such access (12
CFR parts 261 and 261a, respectively).
*
*
*
*
*
By order of the Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System, February 28, 2018.
Margaret M. Shanks,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2018–04385 Filed 3–5–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Authority delegations (Government
agencies), Banks, banking.
Federal Aviation Administration
Authority and Issuance
14 CFR Parts 27 and 29
For the reasons stated in the
Supplementary Information, the Board
of Governors of the Federal Reserve
System amends 12 CFR part 265 as
follows:
[Docket No.: FAA–2016–9275; Amdt. No(s).
27–50, 29–57]
25
U.S.C. 553(b)(A).
5 U.S.C. 601(2).
4 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
5 Public Law 106–102, 113 Stat. 1338, 1471 (1999)
(codified at 12 U.S.C. 4809).
6 See 5 U.S.C. 553(d).
3 See
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
RIN 2120–AK91
Rotorcraft Pilot Compartment View
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The FAA is revising its rules
for pilot compartment view to allow
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\06MRR1.SGM
06MRR1
9420
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 44 / Tuesday, March 6, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
ground tests to demonstrate compliance
for night operations. The requirement
for night flight testing to demonstrate
compliance is not necessary in every
case. The revision will relieve the
burden of performing a night flight test
under certain conditions.
DATES: Effective May 7, 2018.
ADDRESSES: For information on where to
obtain copies of rulemaking documents
and other information related to this
final rule, see ‘‘How To Obtain
Additional Information’’ in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
technical questions concerning this
action, contact Clark Davenport,
Aviation Safety Engineer, Safety
Management Group, Rotorcraft
Directorate, FAA, 10101 Hillwood
Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone
(817) 222–5151; email
Clark.Davenport@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Authority for This Rulemaking
The FAA’s authority to issue rules on
aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the
United States Code. Subtitle I, Section
106 describes the authority of the FAA
Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation
Programs, describes in more detail the
scope of the agency’s authority.
This rulemaking is promulgated
under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Sections
44701 and 44704. Under section 44701,
the FAA is charged with prescribing
regulations promoting safe flight of civil
aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
minimum standards required in the
interest of safety for the design and
performance of aircraft. Under section
44704, the Administrator issues type
certificates for aircraft, aircraft engines,
propellers, and specified appliances
when the Administrator finds the
product is properly designed and
manufactured, performs properly, and
meets the regulations and minimum
standards prescribed under section
44701(a). This regulation is within the
scope of these authorities because it
promotes safety by updating the existing
minimum prescribed standards used
during the type certification process to
address an equivalent method of
showing compliance.
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
I. Background
A. Statement of the Problem
The FAA’s rules on airworthiness
standards for the pilot compartment in
rotorcraft and the requirements for each
pilot’s view from that compartment are
located in parts 27 and 29 of title 14 of
the Code of Federal Regulations (14
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:02 Mar 05, 2018
Jkt 244001
CFR). Specifically, §§ 27.773(a) and
29.773(a) require that each pilot
compartment must be free of glare and
reflection that could interfere with the
pilot’s view. Sections 27.773(b) and
29.773(b) require a flight test to show
compliance with paragraph (a) of their
respective sections if certification for
night operations is requested. While this
requirement applies to all applicants for
rotorcraft installations that may affect
the pilot’s ability to see outside the
aircraft, the FAA finds that a flight test
may not be the only means available to
show compliance for some
modifications. The purpose of the
internal lighting tests is to determine
whether the lighting creates glare and
reflections within the cockpit that could
interfere with the pilot’s view outside of
the aircraft.
The FAA has conducted rotorcraft
ground and flight internal lighting tests
over the past 15 years where all external
lighting was blocked from entering the
cockpit on the ground evaluation and
then conducted the follow-on night
flight tests. They found that the ground
test results were the same as the flight
tests. Based on this experience, the FAA
concluded that the two tests will
provide the same results. The FAA has
determined that creating an
environment where external light is
blocked from entering the cockpit or
where the rotorcraft is placed in a
darkened hangar or paint booth,
provides the same environment as a
night flight test would for cockpit
lighting evaluations. The FAA has
concluded that a ground test provides
the same level of safety and that the
current requirements in §§ 27.773 and
29.773 for a night flight test are
imposing an unnecessary economic
burden on applicants for certification
for night operations.
B. Summary of the NPRM
On October 17, 2016, the FAA
published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM), ‘‘Rotorcraft Pilot
Compartment View’’ (81 FR 71412). The
FAA proposed to allow a ground test as
an alternative to a night flight test in
certain cases to show compliance for
night operations. The FAA included two
Draft Advisory Circulars, (AC) 27–1B,
Certification of Normal Category
Rotorcraft and AC 29–2C, Certification
of Transport Category Rotorcraft, setting
forth the conditions under which a
ground test would be acceptable and an
acceptable means of compliance for the
ground test.1
1 https://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_
Library/.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
The original comment period closed
on November 16, 2016. However, the
FAA did not post the associated draft
advisory circulars (AC) for public
display until November 9, 2016. As a
result, the FAA reopened the comment
period (81 FR 83744) until December 13,
2016.
II. Discussion of Public Comments and
Final Rule
The FAA received comments from
three aviation companies (Aviation
Specialists Unlimited, Inc., Garmin
International, and The Boeing
Company) and three individuals. Two of
the aviation companies and an
individual supported the proposed rule.
The remaining commenters supported
the rule but suggested changes, which
are discussed below.
A. Ground Test Criteria
An individual requested the FAA
clearly define when a ground test can
and cannot be performed and address
factors such as the amount of interior
light emissions, exterior light emissions,
color of light emissions, and focal point
of light intensity.
The FAA notes that Advisory Circular
(AC) 27–1B, Certification of Normal
Category Rotorcraft and AC 29–2C,
Certification of Transport Category
Rotorcraft address the individual’s
comments. AC 27–1B and AC 29–2C
already provide qualitative general
guidance to determine appropriate
testing methods.2
B. Validation of Ground Testing
An individual requested the FAA
conduct tests to analyze specific
proficiencies and deficiencies of
simulated night ground testing.
Alternatively, if there is already
empirical and observational evidence
that proves the safety factors in ground
testing, the commenter requested this be
identified in the final rule.
The FAA’s determination that a
ground test provides the same level of
safety is based on the FAA’s experience
with cockpit lighting evaluations for
rotorcraft certification projects. The
FAA found the two tests had the same
results.
C. Requirements for Night Testing
Two individuals requested that night
testing account for various lighting
scenarios. One of these individuals
requested the FAA conduct tests to
ensure the accuracy of each ground test
simulation using both interior and
exterior lighting effects on the rotorcraft
2 Advisory Circular (AC) 27–1B and AC 29–2C
will be posted in Docket No. FAA–2016–9275.
E:\FR\FM\06MRR1.SGM
06MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 44 / Tuesday, March 6, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
windshield and visibility. Another
individual requested that testing
account for different outside lighting
scenarios through multiple ground tests,
in both a well-lit airfield and a dark
hanger.
The intent of this rule is to allow
ground tests, under certain
circumstances, to demonstrate
compliance for night operations. The
FAA notes the request to add additional
night testing requirements is beyond the
scope of this rulemaking. In light of the
comments, the FAA recognizes the
material in the AC regarding exterior
lighting may create confusion. As a
result, we have revised the AC to clarify
that exterior lighting is identified as
exterior aircraft lighting only.
D. Eliminate Testing Requirement
An aviation company requested that
the FAA eliminate the requirement to
perform either a ground test or a flight
test and require instead that applicants
show ‘‘compliance.’’ In support of this
request, the commenter stated the FAA
and industry are generally in agreement
that regulations be performance-based
without specifying a means of
compliance which, instead, is
established through policy, guidance, or
industry standards.
The requested change to eliminate
testing would compromise the level of
safety intended by this rule. Because of
the complexity and variables involved
in lighting interaction in rotorcraft
cockpits, the FAA has determined that
either a night flight test or a ground test
is required.
The FAA is adopting the rule as
proposed.
IV. Regulatory Notices and Analyses
A. Regulatory Evaluation
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
Changes to Federal regulations must
undergo several economic analyses.
First, Executive Order 12866 and
Executive Order 13563 direct 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:02 Mar 05, 2018
Jkt 244001
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).
In conducting these analyses, FAA
has determined that this proposed rule:
(1) Has regulatory cost savings, (2) is not
an economically ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ as defined in section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866, (3) is not
‘‘significant’’ as defined in DOT’s
Regulatory Policies and Procedures; (4)
would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities; (5) would not create
unnecessary obstacles to the foreign
commerce of the United States; and (6)
would not impose an unfunded
mandate on state, local, or tribal
governments, or on the private sector by
exceeding the threshold identified
above. These analyses are summarized
below.
This portion of the preamble
summarizes the FAA’s analysis of the
economic impacts of this rule.
The FAA determined that this action
will likely result in regulatory cost
savings. The current regulations require
night flight testing to demonstrate
compliance for night operations. This
rule provides a less costly ground test as
an alternative to a night flight test for
certain interior lighting modifications.
Currently, the FAA estimates the total
cost for a night flight test to be $37,280.
These costs include company costs
associated with a ground evaluation
($3,600); company flight test, including
flight preparation ($16,240); company
preparation of the test report ($800); and
FAA flight test, including flight
preparation ($16,640). Under this final
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
9421
rule, companies can demonstrate
compliance on the ground, thereby
avoiding the company and FAA flight
test costs and saving an estimated
$32,880 per demonstration. Under this
rule, the total cost for a ground test is
about $4,400, which is substantially less
costly than a night flight test of $37,280.
The FAA estimates that 10,506
helicopters in the current fleet will be
affected by the final rule. In addition,
the FAA receives approximately 120
certification project tests annually. Note
that after certification, new helicopters
may not need to be upgraded in the next
10 years.3 However, the other
helicopters will need at least 1 cockpit
illumination upgrade within the next 10
years based on FAA data. In particular,
approximately 4,000 rotorcraft will have
to upgrade their automatic dependent
surveillance-broadcast (ADS–B) in the
first 3 years after the rule goes into
effect.4 All of the remaining 6,506 are
expected to have cockpit lighting night
testing due to upgrading
communication, surveillance systems,
or navigation/electronic indicators in
the remaining 7 years.5
As a result, this rule will relieve
industry from performing higher cost
night flight tests with lower cost ground
tests resulting in cost savings. The FAA
estimates industry will gain about
$384.9 million in total undiscounted
cost savings over a 10-year period of
analysis [$32,880 × (10,506 tests + 1,200
certification projects)]. The FAA
estimates industry’s present value cost
savings to be about $277.2 million and
annualized costs savings to be about
$39.5 million using a 7 percent discount
rate. The following table provides cost
savings to industry over a 10-year
period of analysis.
3 As a result, we do not include new helicopters
in this analysis.
4 This is due to the requirements in 14 CFR
91.225, which requires equipage by January 1, 2020.
At the time of this analysis, this equates to about
1,333 per year in the first three years. The actual
number of ADS–B related upgrades available for
cost savings may vary from this analysis depending
on the publication and implementation of this rule
and the ability of all operators to equip ADS–B by
January 1, 2020.
5 This equates to about 929 per year in the
remaining seven years of the period of analysis.
E:\FR\FM\06MRR1.SGM
06MRR1
9422
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 44 / Tuesday, March 6, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
INDUSTRY COST SAVINGS OF FORGONE NIGHT FLIGHT TESTS
Number of tests
Year
Certification
tests
Cost savings
($) *
Rotorcraft
tests
Total
Undiscounted
Present
value at 7%
Present
value at 3%
1 ...............................................................
2 ...............................................................
3 ...............................................................
4 ...............................................................
5 ...............................................................
6 ...............................................................
7 ...............................................................
8 ...............................................................
9 ...............................................................
10 .............................................................
120
120
120
120
120
120
120
120
120
120
1,333
1,333
1,333
929
929
929
929
929
929
929
1,453
1,453
1,453
1,049
1,049
1,049
1,049
1,049
1,049
1,049
47,785,600
47,785,600
47,785,600
34,505,211
34,505,211
34,505,211
34,505,211
34,505,211
34,505,211
34,505,211
44,659,439
41,737,794
39,007,284
26,323,861
24,601,739
22,992,279
21,488,112
20,082,347
18,768,549
17,540,700
46,393,786
45,042,511
43,730,593
30,657,433
29,764,498
28,897,571
28,055,895
27,238,733
26,445,371
25,675,118
Total ..................................................
1,200
10,500
11,700
384,893,280
277,202,103
331,901,510
Annualized .................................
........................
........................
........................
........................
39,467,343
38,908,982
* The cost savings estimates in this table use $32,880 per forgone rotorcraft night flight test (e.g., in the first year, the undiscounted cost savings = $32,880 × 1,453 rotorcraft = $47.8 million).
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
This rule will also save the FAA about
$1,200 per forgone night flight test from
the associated preparation and
reviewing of test flight plans, reports,
and testing time. The FAA will save
about $14 million (undiscounted) over a
10-year period of analysis [$1,200 ×
(10,506 tests + 1,200 certification
projects)]. The FAA estimates its 10-year
present value cost savings to be about
$10 million and the annualized cost
savings to be about $1.4 million at a 7
percent discount rate.
B. 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,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:02 Mar 05, 2018
Jkt 244001
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 rule provides a ground test as an
alternative to a night flight test in
certain cases, such as internal lighting
modifications. The requirements for a
ground test are less costly and stringent
than a night flight test. Thus, this rule
will relieve the industry from the costly
burden of performing night flight tests
under certain conditions. The rule will
result in cost savings for small entities
affected by this rulemaking action.
If an agency determines that a
rulemaking will not result in a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities, the
head of the agency may so certify under
section 605(b) of the RFA. Therefore, as
provided in section 605(b), the head of
the FAA certifies that this rulemaking
will not result in a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
C. International Trade Impact
Assessment
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 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 standard has a
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
legitimate domestic objective, such as
the protection of safety, and does 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. The FAA has assessed
the potential effect of this rule and
determined that it will only have a
domestic impact and, therefore, no
effect on international trade.
D. 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 $155
million in lieu of $100 million. This
rule does not contain such a mandate;
therefore, the requirements of Title II of
the Act do not apply.
E. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires that the
FAA consider the impact of paperwork
and other information collection
burdens imposed on the public. The
FAA has determined that there is no
new requirement for information
collection associated with this final
rule.
E:\FR\FM\06MRR1.SGM
06MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 44 / Tuesday, March 6, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
F. International Compatibility and
Cooperation
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
maximum extent practicable. The FAA
has determined that there are no ICAO
Standards and Recommended Practices
that correspond to these regulations.
G. Environmental Analysis
FAA Order 1050.1F identifies FAA
actions that are categorically excluded
from preparation of an environmental
assessment or environmental impact
statement under the National
Environmental Policy Act in the
absence of extraordinary circumstances.
The FAA has determined this
rulemaking action qualifies for the
categorical exclusion identified in
paragraph 5–6.6 and involves no
extraordinary circumstances.
V. Executive Order Determinations
A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
The FAA has analyzed this rule under
the principles and criteria of Executive
Order 13132, Federalism. The agency
has determined that this action will not
have a substantial direct effect on the
States, or the relationship between the
Federal Government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, and, therefore,
will not have Federalism implications.
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
The FAA analyzed this rule under
Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations that
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). The
FAA has determined that this action
will not be a ‘‘significant energy action’’
under the executive order and will not
likely to have a significant adverse effect
on the supply, distribution, or use of
energy.
C. Executive Order 13609, International
Cooperation
Executive Order 13609, Promoting
International Regulatory Cooperation,
promotes international regulatory
cooperation to meet shared challenges
involving health, safety, labor, security,
environmental, and other issues and to
reduce, eliminate, or prevent
unnecessary differences in regulatory
requirements. The FAA has analyzed
this action under the policies and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:02 Mar 05, 2018
Jkt 244001
agency responsibilities of Executive
Order 13609, and has determined that
this action will have no effect on
international regulatory cooperation.
List of Subjects
D. Executive Order 13771, Reducing
Regulation and Controlling Regulatory
Costs
14 CFR Part 29
This final rule is considered an E.O.
13771 deregulatory action. Details on
the estimated cost savings of this final
rule can be found in the rule’s economic
analysis, above.
9423
The Amendment
VI. How To Obtain Additional
Information
A. Rulemaking Documents
An electronic copy of a rulemaking
document may be obtained by using the
internet.
1. Search the Federal eRulemaking
Portal (https://www.regulations.gov);
2. Visit the FAA’s Regulations and
Policies web page at https://
www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/ or
3. Access the Government Publishing
Office’s web page at https://
www.gpo.gov/fdsys/.
Copies may also be obtained by
sending a request (identified by notice,
amendment, or docket number of this
rulemaking) to the Federal Aviation
Administration, Office of Rulemaking,
ARM–1, 800 Independence Avenue SW,
Washington, DC 20591, or by calling
(202) 267–9680.
B. Comments Submitted to the Docket
Comments received may be viewed by
going to https://www.regulations.gov and
following the online instructions to
search the docket number for this
action. Anyone is able to search the
electronic form of all comments
received into any of the FAA’s 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.).
C. 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.
A small entity with questions regarding
this document, may contact its local
FAA official, or the person listed under
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
heading at the beginning of the
preamble. To find out more about
SBREFA on the internet, visit https://
www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/
rulemaking/sbre_act/.
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
14 CFR Part 27
Aircraft, Aviation safety.
Aircraft, Aviation safety.
In consideration of the foregoing, the
Federal Aviation Administration
amends chapter I of title 14, Code of
Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 27—AIRWORTHINESS
STANDARDS: NORMAL CATEGORY
ROTORCRAFT
1. The authority citation for part 27
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701–
44702, 44704.
2. Amend § 27.773 by revising
paragraph (b) to read as follows:
■
§ 27.773
Pilot compartment view.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) If certification for night operation
is requested, compliance with paragraph
(a) of this section must be shown by
ground or night flight tests.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 29—AIRWORTHINESS
STANDARDS: TRANSPORT
CATEGORY ROTORCRAFT
3. The authority citation for part 29
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701–
44702, 44704.
4. Amend § 29.773 by revising
paragraph (a)(2) to read as follows:
■
§ 29.773
Pilot compartment view.
(a) * * *
(2) Each pilot compartment must be
free of glare and reflection that could
interfere with the pilot’s view. If
certification for night operation is
requested, this must be shown by
ground or night flight tests.
*
*
*
*
*
Issued under authority provided by 49
U.S.C. 106(f), 44701(a), and 44703 in
Washington, DC.
Daniel K. Elwell,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2018–04547 Filed 3–5–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
E:\FR\FM\06MRR1.SGM
06MRR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 44 (Tuesday, March 6, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 9419-9423]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-04547]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Parts 27 and 29
[Docket No.: FAA-2016-9275; Amdt. No(s). 27-50, 29-57]
RIN 2120-AK91
Rotorcraft Pilot Compartment View
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FAA is revising its rules for pilot compartment view to
allow
[[Page 9420]]
ground tests to demonstrate compliance for night operations. The
requirement for night flight testing to demonstrate compliance is not
necessary in every case. The revision will relieve the burden of
performing a night flight test under certain conditions.
DATES: Effective May 7, 2018.
ADDRESSES: For information on where to obtain copies of rulemaking
documents and other information related to this final rule, see ``How
To Obtain Additional Information'' in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical questions concerning
this action, contact Clark Davenport, Aviation Safety Engineer, Safety
Management Group, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy.,
Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone (817) 222-5151; email
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Authority for This Rulemaking
The FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety is found in
Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes
the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation
Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority.
This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Sections 44701 and 44704. Under
section 44701, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
minimum standards required in the interest of safety for the design and
performance of aircraft. Under section 44704, the Administrator issues
type certificates for aircraft, aircraft engines, propellers, and
specified appliances when the Administrator finds the product is
properly designed and manufactured, performs properly, and meets the
regulations and minimum standards prescribed under section 44701(a).
This regulation is within the scope of these authorities because it
promotes safety by updating the existing minimum prescribed standards
used during the type certification process to address an equivalent
method of showing compliance.
I. Background
A. Statement of the Problem
The FAA's rules on airworthiness standards for the pilot
compartment in rotorcraft and the requirements for each pilot's view
from that compartment are located in parts 27 and 29 of title 14 of the
Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). Specifically, Sec. Sec.
27.773(a) and 29.773(a) require that each pilot compartment must be
free of glare and reflection that could interfere with the pilot's
view. Sections 27.773(b) and 29.773(b) require a flight test to show
compliance with paragraph (a) of their respective sections if
certification for night operations is requested. While this requirement
applies to all applicants for rotorcraft installations that may affect
the pilot's ability to see outside the aircraft, the FAA finds that a
flight test may not be the only means available to show compliance for
some modifications. The purpose of the internal lighting tests is to
determine whether the lighting creates glare and reflections within the
cockpit that could interfere with the pilot's view outside of the
aircraft.
The FAA has conducted rotorcraft ground and flight internal
lighting tests over the past 15 years where all external lighting was
blocked from entering the cockpit on the ground evaluation and then
conducted the follow-on night flight tests. They found that the ground
test results were the same as the flight tests. Based on this
experience, the FAA concluded that the two tests will provide the same
results. The FAA has determined that creating an environment where
external light is blocked from entering the cockpit or where the
rotorcraft is placed in a darkened hangar or paint booth, provides the
same environment as a night flight test would for cockpit lighting
evaluations. The FAA has concluded that a ground test provides the same
level of safety and that the current requirements in Sec. Sec. 27.773
and 29.773 for a night flight test are imposing an unnecessary economic
burden on applicants for certification for night operations.
B. Summary of the NPRM
On October 17, 2016, the FAA published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM), ``Rotorcraft Pilot Compartment View'' (81 FR 71412).
The FAA proposed to allow a ground test as an alternative to a night
flight test in certain cases to show compliance for night operations.
The FAA included two Draft Advisory Circulars, (AC) 27-1B,
Certification of Normal Category Rotorcraft and AC 29-2C, Certification
of Transport Category Rotorcraft, setting forth the conditions under
which a ground test would be acceptable and an acceptable means of
compliance for the ground test.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The original comment period closed on November 16, 2016. However,
the FAA did not post the associated draft advisory circulars (AC) for
public display until November 9, 2016. As a result, the FAA reopened
the comment period (81 FR 83744) until December 13, 2016.
II. Discussion of Public Comments and Final Rule
The FAA received comments from three aviation companies (Aviation
Specialists Unlimited, Inc., Garmin International, and The Boeing
Company) and three individuals. Two of the aviation companies and an
individual supported the proposed rule. The remaining commenters
supported the rule but suggested changes, which are discussed below.
A. Ground Test Criteria
An individual requested the FAA clearly define when a ground test
can and cannot be performed and address factors such as the amount of
interior light emissions, exterior light emissions, color of light
emissions, and focal point of light intensity.
The FAA notes that Advisory Circular (AC) 27-1B, Certification of
Normal Category Rotorcraft and AC 29-2C, Certification of Transport
Category Rotorcraft address the individual's comments. AC 27-1B and AC
29-2C already provide qualitative general guidance to determine
appropriate testing methods.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Advisory Circular (AC) 27-1B and AC 29-2C will be posted in
Docket No. FAA-2016-9275.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Validation of Ground Testing
An individual requested the FAA conduct tests to analyze specific
proficiencies and deficiencies of simulated night ground testing.
Alternatively, if there is already empirical and observational evidence
that proves the safety factors in ground testing, the commenter
requested this be identified in the final rule.
The FAA's determination that a ground test provides the same level
of safety is based on the FAA's experience with cockpit lighting
evaluations for rotorcraft certification projects. The FAA found the
two tests had the same results.
C. Requirements for Night Testing
Two individuals requested that night testing account for various
lighting scenarios. One of these individuals requested the FAA conduct
tests to ensure the accuracy of each ground test simulation using both
interior and exterior lighting effects on the rotorcraft
[[Page 9421]]
windshield and visibility. Another individual requested that testing
account for different outside lighting scenarios through multiple
ground tests, in both a well-lit airfield and a dark hanger.
The intent of this rule is to allow ground tests, under certain
circumstances, to demonstrate compliance for night operations. The FAA
notes the request to add additional night testing requirements is
beyond the scope of this rulemaking. In light of the comments, the FAA
recognizes the material in the AC regarding exterior lighting may
create confusion. As a result, we have revised the AC to clarify that
exterior lighting is identified as exterior aircraft lighting only.
D. Eliminate Testing Requirement
An aviation company requested that the FAA eliminate the
requirement to perform either a ground test or a flight test and
require instead that applicants show ``compliance.'' In support of this
request, the commenter stated the FAA and industry are generally in
agreement that regulations be performance-based without specifying a
means of compliance which, instead, is established through policy,
guidance, or industry standards.
The requested change to eliminate testing would compromise the
level of safety intended by this rule. Because of the complexity and
variables involved in lighting interaction in rotorcraft cockpits, the
FAA has determined that either a night flight test or a ground test is
required.
The FAA is adopting the rule as proposed.
IV. Regulatory Notices and Analyses
A. Regulatory Evaluation
Changes to Federal regulations must undergo several economic
analyses. First, Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563 direct
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).
In conducting these analyses, FAA has determined that this proposed
rule: (1) Has regulatory cost savings, (2) is not an economically
``significant regulatory action'' as defined in section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866, (3) is not ``significant'' as defined in DOT's
Regulatory Policies and Procedures; (4) would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities; (5) would
not create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United
States; and (6) would not impose an unfunded mandate on state, local,
or tribal governments, or on the private sector by exceeding the
threshold identified above. These analyses are summarized below.
This portion of the preamble summarizes the FAA's analysis of the
economic impacts of this rule.
The FAA determined that this action will likely result in
regulatory cost savings. The current regulations require night flight
testing to demonstrate compliance for night operations. This rule
provides a less costly ground test as an alternative to a night flight
test for certain interior lighting modifications. Currently, the FAA
estimates the total cost for a night flight test to be $37,280. These
costs include company costs associated with a ground evaluation
($3,600); company flight test, including flight preparation ($16,240);
company preparation of the test report ($800); and FAA flight test,
including flight preparation ($16,640). Under this final rule,
companies can demonstrate compliance on the ground, thereby avoiding
the company and FAA flight test costs and saving an estimated $32,880
per demonstration. Under this rule, the total cost for a ground test is
about $4,400, which is substantially less costly than a night flight
test of $37,280.
The FAA estimates that 10,506 helicopters in the current fleet will
be affected by the final rule. In addition, the FAA receives
approximately 120 certification project tests annually. Note that after
certification, new helicopters may not need to be upgraded in the next
10 years.\3\ However, the other helicopters will need at least 1
cockpit illumination upgrade within the next 10 years based on FAA
data. In particular, approximately 4,000 rotorcraft will have to
upgrade their automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast (ADS-B) in the
first 3 years after the rule goes into effect.\4\ All of the remaining
6,506 are expected to have cockpit lighting night testing due to
upgrading communication, surveillance systems, or navigation/electronic
indicators in the remaining 7 years.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ As a result, we do not include new helicopters in this
analysis.
\4\ This is due to the requirements in 14 CFR 91.225, which
requires equipage by January 1, 2020. At the time of this analysis,
this equates to about 1,333 per year in the first three years. The
actual number of ADS-B related upgrades available for cost savings
may vary from this analysis depending on the publication and
implementation of this rule and the ability of all operators to
equip ADS-B by January 1, 2020.
\5\ This equates to about 929 per year in the remaining seven
years of the period of analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As a result, this rule will relieve industry from performing higher
cost night flight tests with lower cost ground tests resulting in cost
savings. The FAA estimates industry will gain about $384.9 million in
total undiscounted cost savings over a 10-year period of analysis
[$32,880 x (10,506 tests + 1,200 certification projects)]. The FAA
estimates industry's present value cost savings to be about $277.2
million and annualized costs savings to be about $39.5 million using a
7 percent discount rate. The following table provides cost savings to
industry over a 10-year period of analysis.
[[Page 9422]]
Industry Cost Savings of Forgone Night Flight Tests
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of tests Cost savings ($) *
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year Certification Rotorcraft Present value Present value
tests tests Total Undiscounted at 7% at 3%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1....................................................... 120 1,333 1,453 47,785,600 44,659,439 46,393,786
2....................................................... 120 1,333 1,453 47,785,600 41,737,794 45,042,511
3....................................................... 120 1,333 1,453 47,785,600 39,007,284 43,730,593
4....................................................... 120 929 1,049 34,505,211 26,323,861 30,657,433
5....................................................... 120 929 1,049 34,505,211 24,601,739 29,764,498
6....................................................... 120 929 1,049 34,505,211 22,992,279 28,897,571
7....................................................... 120 929 1,049 34,505,211 21,488,112 28,055,895
8....................................................... 120 929 1,049 34,505,211 20,082,347 27,238,733
9....................................................... 120 929 1,049 34,505,211 18,768,549 26,445,371
10...................................................... 120 929 1,049 34,505,211 17,540,700 25,675,118
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total............................................... 1,200 10,500 11,700 384,893,280 277,202,103 331,901,510
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized...................................... .............. .............. .............. .............. 39,467,343 38,908,982
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The cost savings estimates in this table use $32,880 per forgone rotorcraft night flight test (e.g., in the first year, the undiscounted cost savings
= $32,880 x 1,453 rotorcraft = $47.8 million).
This rule will also save the FAA about $1,200 per forgone night
flight test from the associated preparation and reviewing of test
flight plans, reports, and testing time. The FAA will save about $14
million (undiscounted) over a 10-year period of analysis [$1,200 x
(10,506 tests + 1,200 certification projects)]. The FAA estimates its
10-year present value cost savings to be about $10 million and the
annualized cost savings to be about $1.4 million at a 7 percent
discount rate.
B. 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 rule provides a ground test as an alternative to a night
flight test in certain cases, such as internal lighting modifications.
The requirements for a ground test are less costly and stringent than a
night flight test. Thus, this rule will relieve the industry from the
costly burden of performing night flight tests under certain
conditions. The rule will result in cost savings for small entities
affected by this rulemaking action.
If an agency determines that a rulemaking will not result in a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities,
the head of the agency may so certify under section 605(b) of the RFA.
Therefore, as provided in section 605(b), the head of the FAA certifies
that this rulemaking will not result in a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities.
C. International Trade Impact Assessment
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 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 standard has a legitimate domestic
objective, such as the protection of safety, and does 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. The FAA has
assessed the potential effect of this rule and determined that it will
only have a domestic impact and, therefore, no effect on international
trade.
D. 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 $155 million in lieu of $100
million. This rule does not contain such a mandate; therefore, the
requirements of Title II of the Act do not apply.
E. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires
that the FAA consider the impact of paperwork and other information
collection burdens imposed on the public. The FAA has determined that
there is no new requirement for information collection associated with
this final rule.
[[Page 9423]]
F. International Compatibility and Cooperation
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 maximum extent practicable. The FAA has
determined that there are no ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices
that correspond to these regulations.
G. Environmental Analysis
FAA Order 1050.1F identifies FAA actions that are categorically
excluded from preparation of an environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement under the National Environmental Policy
Act in the absence of extraordinary circumstances. The FAA has
determined this rulemaking action qualifies for the categorical
exclusion identified in paragraph 5-6.6 and involves no extraordinary
circumstances.
V. Executive Order Determinations
A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
The FAA has analyzed this rule under the principles and criteria of
Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The agency has determined that this
action will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, or the
relationship between the Federal Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government, and, therefore, will not have Federalism implications.
B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
The FAA analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). The FAA has determined that this
action will not be a ``significant energy action'' under the executive
order and will not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the
supply, distribution, or use of energy.
C. Executive Order 13609, International Cooperation
Executive Order 13609, Promoting International Regulatory
Cooperation, promotes international regulatory cooperation to meet
shared challenges involving health, safety, labor, security,
environmental, and other issues and to reduce, eliminate, or prevent
unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements. The FAA has
analyzed this action under the policies and agency responsibilities of
Executive Order 13609, and has determined that this action will have no
effect on international regulatory cooperation.
D. Executive Order 13771, Reducing Regulation and Controlling
Regulatory Costs
This final rule is considered an E.O. 13771 deregulatory action.
Details on the estimated cost savings of this final rule can be found
in the rule's economic analysis, above.
VI. How To Obtain Additional Information
A. Rulemaking Documents
An electronic copy of a rulemaking document may be obtained by
using the internet.
1. Search the Federal eRulemaking Portal (https://www.regulations.gov);
2. Visit the FAA's Regulations and Policies web page at https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/ or
3. Access the Government Publishing Office's web page at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/.
Copies may also be obtained by sending a request (identified by
notice, amendment, or docket number of this rulemaking) to the Federal
Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence
Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591, or by calling (202) 267-9680.
B. Comments Submitted to the Docket
Comments received may be viewed by going to https://www.regulations.gov and following the online instructions to search the
docket number for this action. Anyone is able to search the electronic
form of all comments received into any of the FAA's 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.).
C. 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. A small entity with questions regarding this document,
may contact its local FAA official, or the person listed under the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT heading at the beginning of the preamble.
To find out more about SBREFA on the internet, visit https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/sbre_act/.
List of Subjects
14 CFR Part 27
Aircraft, Aviation safety.
14 CFR Part 29
Aircraft, Aviation safety.
The Amendment
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends chapter I of title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations as follows:
PART 27--AIRWORTHINESS STANDARDS: NORMAL CATEGORY ROTORCRAFT
0
1. The authority citation for part 27 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701-44702, 44704.
0
2. Amend Sec. 27.773 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 27.773 Pilot compartment view.
* * * * *
(b) If certification for night operation is requested, compliance
with paragraph (a) of this section must be shown by ground or night
flight tests.
* * * * *
PART 29--AIRWORTHINESS STANDARDS: TRANSPORT CATEGORY ROTORCRAFT
0
3. The authority citation for part 29 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701-44702, 44704.
0
4. Amend Sec. 29.773 by revising paragraph (a)(2) to read as follows:
Sec. 29.773 Pilot compartment view.
(a) * * *
(2) Each pilot compartment must be free of glare and reflection
that could interfere with the pilot's view. If certification for night
operation is requested, this must be shown by ground or night flight
tests.
* * * * *
Issued under authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 44701(a),
and 44703 in Washington, DC.
Daniel K. Elwell,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2018-04547 Filed 3-5-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
