Rotorcraft Pilot Compartment View, 9419-9423 [2018-04547]

Download as PDF 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 http://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 (http://www.regulations.gov); 2. Visit the FAA’s Regulations and Policies web page at http:// www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/ or 3. Access the Government Publishing Office’s web page at http:// 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 http://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 http:// 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\ http://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 (http://www.regulations.gov);
    2. Visit the FAA's Regulations and Policies web page at http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/ or
    3. Access the Government Publishing Office's web page at http://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 http://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 http://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