U.S. Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act Incorporation, 76714-76730 [2024-20900]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
76714
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 182 / Thursday, September 19, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
or North order. This action corrects that
error.
Correction to Final Rule
Accordingly, pursuant to the
authority delegated to me, Amendment
of Jet Route J–133 and Establishment of
Area Navigation Route Q–801 in the
Vicinity of Anchorage, SK, published in
the Federal Register of August 30, 2024
(89 FR 70474), FR Doc. 2024–19356, is
corrected as follows:
■ On page 70475, in column 2, under
the heading ‘‘The Rule,’’ the second
paragraph is revised to read as follows:
J–133: Jet route J–133 extends
between Anchorage, AK, VOR/DME and
Galena, AK, VOR/DME.
■ On page 70476, at the top of column
3, the description for Jet Route J–133 is
revised to read as follows:
J–133 [Amended]
From Galena, AK to Anchorage, AK.
*
*
*
*
*
Issued in Washington, DC, on September
13, 2024.
Frank Lias,
Manager, Rules and Regulations Group.
[FR Doc. 2024–21260 Filed 9–18–24; 8:45 am]
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Parts 401, 413, 415, 431, 435,
437, 440, 450, and 460
[Docket No. FAA–2023–1656; Amdt. Nos.
401–10, 413–13, 415–8, 431–8, 435–6, 437–
4, 440–7, 450–3, 460–4]
RIN 2120–AL19
U.S. Commercial Space Launch
Competitiveness Act Incorporation
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This final rule incorporates
various changes required by the United
States Commercial Space Launch
Competitiveness Act of 2015. This final
rule provides regulatory clarity to
applicants seeking licenses for space
flight operations involving government
astronauts by adding two new subparts
to the human space flight regulations
containing requirements for operators
with government astronauts with and
without safety-critical roles on board
vehicles.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
SUMMARY:
Effective November 18, 2024.
The compliance date for this final rule
is November 18, 2024.
DATES:
15:57 Sep 18, 2024
List of Abbreviations and Acronyms
Frequently Used in This Document
Expendable Launch Vehicle (ELV)
International Civil Aviation
Organization (ICAO)
Maximum Probable Loss (MPL)
National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA)
Reusable Launch Vehicle (RLV)
United States Commercial Space
Launch Competitiveness Act
(CSLCA)
United States Government (USG)
Table of Contents
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
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:
Charles Huet, Space Policy Division,
Space Regulations and Standards
Branch, ASZ–210, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence
Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591;
telephone (202) 306–9069; email
charles.huet@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
ADDRESSES:
Jkt 262001
I. Authority for This Rulemaking
II. Executive Summary
A. Purpose of the Regulatory Action
B. Changes From the Proposed Rule
C. Summary of the Costs and Benefits
III. Background
A. Summary of the NPRM
B. General Overview of Comments
C. Differences Between the NPRM and the
Final Rule
IV. Discussion of Comments and the Final
Rule
V. Regulatory Notices and Analyses
A. Regulatory Impact Analysis
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
C. International Trade Impact Assessment
D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment
E. Paperwork Reduction Act
F. Environmental Analysis
VI. Executive Order Determinations
A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
B. Executive Order 13175, Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
C. Executive Order 13211, Regulations
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
D. Executive Order 13609, Promoting
International Regulatory Cooperation
VII. Additional Information
A. Electronic Access and Filing
B. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act
List of Subjects
I. Authority for This Rulemaking
The Commercial Space Launch Act of
1984, as amended and codified at 51
U.S.C. 50901–50923 (the Act),
authorizes the Secretary of
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Transportation to oversee, license, and
regulate commercial launch and reentry
activities, and the operation of launch
and reentry sites within the United
States (U.S.) or as carried out by U.S.
citizens. Section 50905 directs the
Secretary to exercise this responsibility
consistent with public health and safety,
safety of property, and the national
security and foreign policy interests of
the United States. In addition, section
50903 requires the Secretary to
encourage, facilitate, and promote
commercial space launches and
reentries by the private sector. As
codified in 49 CFR 1.83(b), the Secretary
has delegated authority to the FAA
Administrator to carry out these
functions.
II. Executive Summary
A. Purpose of the Regulatory Action
This rule makes several changes to
incorporate government astronauts in
the regulations, in accordance with the
United States Commercial Space
Launch Competitiveness Act (CSLCA).1
It amends title 14 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) parts 401, 413,
415, 431, 435, 437, 440, 450, and 460 by
incorporating statutory changes
resulting from the CSLCA. Specifically,
it adds definitions for ‘‘Government
astronaut,’’ ‘‘International partner
astronaut,’’ and ‘‘International Space
Station Intergovernmental Agreement,’’
and revises definitions of ‘‘Human space
flight incident,’’ ‘‘Launch,’’ ‘‘Launch
accident,’’ ‘‘Reenter; reentry’’ ‘‘Reentry
accident,’’ and ‘‘Space flight
participant,’’ to incorporate changes
required by adding the definition of
‘‘Government astronaut.’’ The rule also
creates two new subparts in 14 CFR part
460 that include requirements for
operators and applicants whose licensed
or permitted operations involve
government astronauts with and
without safety-critical roles on board a
vehicle. The rule revises the human
space flight sections of parts 415, 431,
435, 437, and 450 to add government
astronauts to the list of people who can
be on board a launch or reentry vehicle,
and adds certain additional provisions
in part 460 to the list of provisions with
which an operator must comply.
Additionally, this rule expands the
applicability of part 437 to include
launching or reentering certain reusable
suborbital vehicles. The rule also revises
parts 401, 413, 415, 431, 435, 437, 440,
1 The CSLCA adds government astronauts as a
third category of people on board launch or reentry
vehicles, excludes government astronauts from the
definition of third party, adds space flight
participants to the waiver of claims with operators,
and expands the applicability of permits to more
types of vehicles and operations.
E:\FR\FM\19SER1.SGM
19SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 182 / Thursday, September 19, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
450, and 460 to make conforming
amendments to expand the eligibility
for an experimental permit from
reusable suborbital rockets to reusable
suborbital vehicles.
The rule revises part 440 in
accordance with the statute and makes
conforming amendments. Specifically, it
updates the financial responsibility
requirements in part 440 to exclude
government astronauts from the
definitions of ‘‘Third party’’ and
‘‘Maximum probable loss (MPL)’’. It also
adds space flight participants to the
insurance requirements in § 440.9 and
the reciprocal waiver of claims
requirements in § 440.17. Finally, this
rule removes the templates for waiver of
claims and assumption of
responsibilities in appendices B through
E of part 440 from the regulations and
places them in a separate advisory
circular (AC).
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
B. Changes From the Proposed Rule
The final rule makes several changes
from the proposed rule. It replaces the
proposed term ‘‘human being,’’
proposed in the notice, with ‘‘crew,
space flight participant, or government
astronaut’’ in the human space flight
requirements of 14 CFR 415.8, 431.8,
435.8, and 437.21(b)(3). In 14 CFR
440.3, the final rule does not adopt the
proposed change to government
personnel; and excludes government
astronaut from the definitions of MPL
and third party. The final rule amends
the proposed language regarding the
reciprocal waiver of claims templates to
specify that the templates contained in
advisory circular AC 440.17–1 satisfy
the reciprocal waiver of claims
requirements in 14 CFR 440.17. The
final rule replaces the proposed
requirement in 14 CFR 460.59(d)(1) to
track and update government astronaut
training in writing with the requirement
to provide traceability to revisions or
changes to government astronaut
training. Finally, the final rule changes
the proposed requirement for operators
to train government astronauts in 14
CFR 460.59 and 460.67 to a requirement
that operators ensure government
astronauts are trained.
C. Summary of the Costs and Benefits
These changes have a minimal impact
on licensed commercial space activity
with government astronauts because the
changes align regulations with the
current statutory requirements and
practices for crew, space flight
participants, and government
astronauts. The FAA has been applying
the statutory changes since they went
into effect in 2015. Since this rule
codifies these current practices, there is
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Sep 18, 2024
Jkt 262001
effectively no change from the baseline
practice without the rule, and therefore
no measurable resulting benefits or
costs.
III. Background
A. Summary of the NPRM
On August 18, 2023, the FAA
published the notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) titled ‘‘U.S.
Commercial Space Launch
Competitiveness Act Incorporation’’ (88
FR 56546). The FAA also posted draft
guidance material for the proposal in
the form of a draft ‘‘AC 440.17–1
Reciprocal Waiver of Claims
Requirements’’ for comment in the
NPRM docket. This NPRM proposed to
amend 14 CFR parts 401, 413, 415, 431,
435, 437, 440, 450, and 460 by
incorporating statutory changes
resulting from the CSLCA. The NPRM
proposed to add definitions for
‘‘Government astronaut,’’ ‘‘International
partner astronaut,’’ and ‘‘International
Space Station Intergovernmental
Agreement’’ and revise other definitions
required to address the addition of
‘‘Government astronaut.’’ The NPRM
also proposed expanding applicability
of permitted operations for suborbital
rockets to suborbital launch and reentry
vehicles; revising the human space
flight sections of parts 415, 431, 435,
437, and 450 to include the term
‘‘human being’’ to incorporate
government astronauts; updating the
financial responsibility requirements to
exclude government astronauts from the
definitions of ‘‘Third party’’ and
‘‘Government personnel’’ in part 440;
adding space flight participants to the
insurance requirements in § 440.9, and
the reciprocal waiver of claims
requirements in § 440.17; and removing
the templates for waiver of claims and
assumption of responsibilities in
appendices B through E of part 440 from
the regulations and placing them in a
separate advisory circular (AC). Finally,
the NPRM proposed creating two new
subparts in 14 CFR part 460 to include
requirements for operators and
applicants who’s licensed or permitted
operations involve government
astronauts with and without safetycritical roles on board a vehicle.
B. General Overview of Comments
The FAA received 15 comments from
individuals, industry associations, and
launch and reentry operators. All of the
commenters generally supported the
proposed changes; however, some
suggested changes to the proposal, as
discussed more fully in Section IV.
The FAA received comments on the
following general areas of the proposal:
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
76715
1. Removing government astronauts
from the definition of third party
2. Duplication of requirements
3. Informed consent of government
astronauts
4. Government astronauts without a
safety-critical role
5. Moving waiver of claims templates to
an advisory circular
6. Government astronauts on permitted
operations
7. Tracking government astronaut
training requirements
8. Environmental controls
9. Use of the term ‘‘human being’’
10. Aeronautical knowledge
requirement
11. Permit eligibility
12. Government astronauts on foreign
vehicles
13. Clarification on the role of
international partner astronauts
14. Training of space flight participants
for safety critical roles
15. Use of American National Standards
Institute (ANSI) standard for human
spaceflight ontology
16. Transparency of MPL Methodology
17. Commercial Use of Asteroid or
Space Resources
C. Differences Between the NPRM and
the Final Rule
The final rule does not adopt the
proposed change to the definition of
‘‘government personnel’’ in 14 CFR
440.3; and excludes government
astronauts from the definitions of third
party and maximum probable loss in the
same section. The final rule replaces the
proposed term ‘‘human being’’ with
‘‘crew, space flight participant, or
government astronaut’’ in 14 CFR 415.8,
431.8, 435.8, and 437.21(b)(3). The FAA
also amends the government astronaut
training requirements in the final rule to
make clear that an operator must ensure
government astronauts are appropriately
trained but is not required to conduct
that training itself. Finally, the final rule
allows electronic means of tracking
government astronaut training.
IV. Discussion of Comments and the
Final Rule
The FAA makes changes to this final
rule in response to comments made by
the public. Summaries of the comments
and the FAA’s responses are grouped by
category in the following subsections.
A. Treatment of Government Astronauts
Under Part 440
In accordance with the CSLCA,2 this
rule excludes government astronauts
from the definition of third party. It also
revises the definition of maximum
2 51
E:\FR\FM\19SER1.SGM
U.S.C. 50902 and 50914.
19SER1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
76716
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 182 / Thursday, September 19, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
probable loss (MPL) such that
government astronauts are not included
in MPL calculations. It makes no change
to the definition of government
personnel.3
Title 51 U.S.C. chapter 509 requires a
licensee to obtain insurance or
demonstrate financial responsibility in
amounts to compensate for the
maximum probable loss from claims by
third parties and the United States
Government (USG) for certain specified
claims. 51 U.S.C. 50914(a)(1). By
excluding government astronauts from
the definition of third party, government
astronauts must also necessarily be
excluded from the MPL calculation in
§ 50914(a)(1)(A). The NPRM proposed to
exclude government astronauts from the
definition of ‘‘third party’’ and
consequently the definition of
‘‘government personnel’’ because
government personnel are third parties
under 14 CFR 440.3. Under the
proposal, the presence of government
astronauts during licensed or permitted
activities would not affect the amount of
insurance coverage operators are
required to obtain under 14 CFR 440.9.
Additionally, by excluding government
astronauts from the definition of
‘‘government personnel’’ in § 440.3,
government astronauts would have also
necessarily been excluded as additional
insureds under § 440.9(b).
Multiple commenters indicated that it
is not clear in the NPRM who is
responsible for losses to government
astronauts during licensed activities.
Sierra Space commented that it believes
section 112(j) of the CSLCA amended
the definition of ‘‘third party’’ in 51
U.S.C. 50902(26) to exclude government
astronauts. Sierra Space found that this
is a logical exclusion, as government
astronauts are intentionally
incorporated and integrated into launch
missions and should not be treated as
third parties for liability purposes.
Virgin Galactic commented that the
removal of government astronauts from
the definition of government personnel
removes the requirement for licensees to
obtain an insurance policy to protect
government astronauts from their
potential liability in their involvement
in launch or reentry services. Virgin
Galactic also commented that the
exclusion of government astronauts
from the definition of third party will
prevent the FAA from including
potential government astronaut claims
in MPL calculations. Virgin Galactic
requested that the FAA address the
implications the exclusion of
3 The NPRM proposed changing the definition of
‘‘government personnel’’ but the final rule is not
adopting that change.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Sep 18, 2024
Jkt 262001
government astronauts from the
definition of third party will have on
MPL determinations and
indemnification eligibility under 51
U.S.C. 50915. Virgin Galactic noted that
it understands the proposed rule as
preventing licensees from being eligible
for government indemnification when
carrying government astronauts as
government astronauts are neither third
parties nor government personnel.
In the final rule, the FAA explicitly
excludes government astronauts from
the definition of ‘‘third party’’ in § 440.3
by adding the phrase ‘‘excluding
government astronauts’’ and adding text
that excludes government astronauts
from government personnel as it is used
in the definition of ‘‘third party.’’
Excluding government astronauts from
being considered a third party
effectively means that government
astronauts are not included in MPL
calculations and are therefore prevented
from bringing claims as third parties.
The presence of government astronauts
on board a launch or reentry vehicle
would therefore not increase MPL
values. Because government astronauts
are not third parties, they cannot
recover for bodily injury or property
damage they may suffer during licensed
activities using the licensee’s or
permittee’s insurance required under
§ 440.9. However, the USG could be
responsible for losses to government
astronauts who are USG employees
because the USG agrees to be
responsible for personal injury to, death
of, or property damage or loss sustained
by its own employees through the
waiver of claims.
Excluding government astronauts
from the definition of third parties does
not affect the government
indemnification provisions in 51 U.S.C.
50915. Section 50915 states that the
USG, subject to appropriation or
additional legislative authority, shall
provide for the payment of certain
successful claims by a third party as a
result of licensed activity to the extent
the total amount of successful claims
related to one launch or reentry exceeds
the insurance or demonstration of
financial responsibility values and is
less than the maximum amount set in
§ 50915(a)(1)(B). Virgin Galactic stated
that it understands the proposal would
prevent licensees from being eligible for
government indemnification when
carrying government astronauts as the
government astronauts are neither third
parties nor government personnel under
the proposed rule.
The characterization of government
astronauts as not being third parties
under the CSLCA and part 440 does not
affect whether a licensee receives
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
government indemnification under
§ 50915. Rather, the total number of
successful claims, along with the
necessary appropriations or legislation,
are determining factors in whether a
licensee receives government
indemnification. A licensed activity
with only government astronauts on
board would not render that activity
ineligible for government
indemnification of a successful claim of
a third party.
In the final rule, the FAA does not
amend the definition of government
personnel in 14 CFR 440.3. By
rulemaking finalized in 1998, the FAA
added the term ‘‘government personnel’’
to part 440 and added government
personnel to the list of additional
insureds. Financial Responsibility
Requirements for Licensed Launch
Activities, Final Rule, 63 FR 45592
(Aug. 26, 1998). As it explained in the
preamble to the final rule, the FAA
made these changes in response to a
Senate Report stating that Congress
intended for government personnel
directly associated with the commercial
launch operations to be classified as
third parties. S. Rep. No. 100–593
(1988). The FAA additionally stated in
the Financial Responsibility
Requirements for Licensed Launch
Activities NPRM, published in 1996,
that treating government personnel as
third parties and naming them as
additional insureds is in accord with the
definition of third party contained in
the statute. Financial Responsibility
Requirements for Licensed Launch
Activities, NPRM, 61 FR 38992 (July 25,
1996). This is because employees of the
USG are different than the USG as an
entity. Because of this distinction,
treating USG employees as third parties
did not conflict with the statute.
In 2015, Congress explicitly excluded
government astronauts from the
definition of third parties. There is no
legislative history to suggest that
Congress also wanted the FAA to
exclude government astronauts who are
USG personnel from being protected as
additional insureds. In fact, under the
CSLCA, Congress made changes to the
additional insureds requirement in 51
U.S.C. 50914(a)(4) by adding space
flight participants as additional insureds
but did not make any changes to
explicitly exclude government
astronauts. Therefore, government
astronauts who are USG personnel
should also be treated as additional
insureds. The FAA need not make any
changes to § 440.9(b) to include
government astronauts because any
government astronauts who are
employees of the USG are necessarily
E:\FR\FM\19SER1.SGM
19SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 182 / Thursday, September 19, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
included as additional insureds by
being government personnel.
B. Duplication of Requirements
This rule finalizes the proposal to
create two new subparts in part 460 to
address the training of government
astronauts with safety-critical and nonsafety-critical roles during licensed
activity. The FAA revises the language
in the proposal regarding training
government astronauts to clarify that
while an operator is responsible for
ensuring that a government astronaut is
appropriately trained, the operator itself
is not required to conduct the training.
SpaceX commented that the FAA’s
proposed changes to part 460 would
duplicate training requirements with no
material increase to public safety and
would place additional regulatory
burden on operators. SpaceX argued
that NASA’s training requirements are
sufficient and should automatically be
accepted by the FAA. SpaceX also noted
that it believes the NPRM could
potentially conflict with NASA’s or
other government agencies’ training
requirements in the future. SpaceX
stated that the FAA already recognizes
the appropriateness of certain NASA
training requirements by referring to
them in the NPRM. SpaceX also noted
that all or nearly all of the part 460
regulations could be met by current
Crew Dragon training approved by
NASA as part of the Commercial Crew
Program. While SpaceX agreed with the
FAA’s statements in the NPRM that the
FAA has broader regulatory authority to
protect public safety, SpaceX does not
believe the FAA has articulated why a
streamlined acceptance of NASA
training requirements is insufficient to
protect public safety. To support its
position, SpaceX stated that the part 450
payload review and determination
requirements explicitly remove any
duplication of government oversight in
§ 450.43(b) in which the FAA defers
payload review to agencies with
principal regulatory responsibility.
SpaceX noted that the FAA should
adopt the same approach as it relates to
government astronaut training
requirements in part 460. SpaceX
recommended that the FAA revise the
final rule to codify that its training
requirements are ‘‘not intended to
duplicate, conflict with, or replace
NASA’s training requirements for
government astronauts’’ by following
the § 450.43(b) model. SpaceX suggested
a single update in § 460.59 applicable
only to government astronauts that
states ‘‘An operator must certify that
each government astronaut is trained in
accordance with requirements
established or approved by the National
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Sep 18, 2024
Jkt 262001
Aeronautics and Space Administration
for government astronauts.’’ SpaceX
stated that these revisions will provide
flexibility for any future updates to
training processes with NASA or the
incorporation of NASA-approved
training regimens with other
government agencies, both domestically
and internationally.
Under 51 U.S.C. chapter 509, the FAA
has the authority and responsibility to
protect public safety during launches
and reentries. NASA does not share this
public safety oversight authority.
Because government astronauts may
have the ability to affect public safety,
the FAA must establish regulations to
mitigate any public safety risk.
Furthermore, the FAA notes that NASA
does not currently provide all
government astronaut training for a
commercially operated mission. An
operator would provide vehicle- and
mission-specific training because it is
the most familiar with the specific
vehicle and operation. The FAA chose
to use part 460 crew training
requirements to evaluate past licenses
involving government astronauts
because crew similarly have the
capability to affect public safety. An
operator can meet part 460 requirements
by leveraging the contractual obligations
between NASA and the operator. NASA
contractual obligations require the
operator to comply with requirements
NASA uses to certify operations to the
International Space Station contained in
the Crew Transportation Technical
Management Process CCT–PLN–1120
Section 6.3.1, Crew Transportation and
Services Requirements Document CCT–
REQ–1130 Section 3.8.5.1, and Crew
Transportation Operations Standards
CCT–STD–1150 Section 5. NASA
certifies that government astronauts
received the training required by
contract, and the FAA uses that
certification as verification that the
operator meets the FAA regulations.
NASA provides certification and the
FAA evaluates the contractual
requirements during the licensing
process. The FAA notes that there will
be no change to how licenses involving
government astronauts are evaluated
and issued as a result of this rule.
The payload review requirements in
14 CFR 450.43(b) specify that the FAA
will not make a payload determination
for those aspects of payloads that are
subject to regulation by the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) or
the Department of Commerce. The FAA
will review all payloads to determine
their effect on safety of launch but will
not make a determination on those
aspects of payloads that are subject to
regulation by the FCC or the Department
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
76717
of Commerce. Streamlined Launch and
Reentry License Requirements, Final
Rule, 85 FR 79566, 79589 (Dec. 10,
2020). Similarly, in this rule, the FAA
finalizes requirements that allow the
FAA to satisfy its responsibility to
evaluate licenses for operations
including government astronauts for the
purposes of a government astronaut’s
potential to affect public safety.
While the FAA maintains its authority
to issue regulations relating to the
training of government astronauts to
protect public safety, it acknowledges
that the operator may not always be the
entity conducting the training. For
example, some training may be
provided by NASA or by a contractor.
Therefore, in this final rule the FAA
changes the text in §§ 460.59 and 460.67
training sections for government
astronauts from ‘‘an operator must train
each government astronaut’’ to ‘‘an
operator must ensure that each
government astronaut is trained’’.
Instead of requiring operators to train
each government astronaut, the FAA
rule specifies that an operator must
ensure that training has been provided
to each government astronaut. This
change clarifies that operators do not
necessarily need to be the entity
providing the training; however, the
requirement is still levied on the
operator to ensure that government
astronauts have been trained in
accordance with the regulatory
requirements.
C. Informed Consent of Government
Astronauts
This final rule does not require
government astronauts to sign informed
consent forms with operators. Two
commenters disagreed with this
approach.
Virgin Galactic commented that not
all potential government astronauts may
be in the NASA Astronaut Corps or have
the level of training to understand the
inherent risks associated with
spaceflight activities. Virgin Galactic
also commented that there are several
state statutes that protect licensees from
liability when informed consent is
provided.
Blue Origin commented that the
requirements in § 460.45 are intended to
illuminate the specific risks and hazards
associated with the commercial safety
record of each launch vehicle, as well as
the general risks of spaceflight. Blue
Origin noted that it remains prudent to
provide government astronauts with the
same information and opportunities for
dialogue available to space flight
participants. Blue Origin also
recommended that government
astronauts without safety-critical roles
E:\FR\FM\19SER1.SGM
19SER1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
76718
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 182 / Thursday, September 19, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
be informed of the risks associated with
spaceflight, similar to the informed
consent space flight participants must
provide. Blue Origin suggested that the
FAA adopt language similar to § 460.45
in its proposed subpart D to apply the
same requirement to government
astronauts without a safety-critical role.
The FAA is not adding a requirement
that government astronauts provide
informed consent to the final rule
because, as it stated in the NPRM,
government astronauts are aware of the
risks of space flight. As explained in the
NPRM, the NASA Administrator
designates government astronauts, and
that designation implies appropriate
knowledge and training for the
performance of official duties. In
addition, there is no statutory
requirement for government astronauts
to sign informed consent forms and
doing so may interfere with their rights
under the Federal Employees’
Compensation Act. Therefore, the U.S.
government should inform government
astronauts of any risks they may be
exposed to while performing official
duties. This applies to all government
astronauts, including those with a
safety-critical role.
In response to Virgin Galactic’s
concern that state statutes protect
licensees from liability when informed
consent is provided, in most, if not all,
of these states the respective statutes
provide specific informed consent
language that serves as a waiver of
claims between the operator and the
participant. The consideration of
informed consent as a waiver of claims
is further reason why a government
astronaut should not sign an informed
consent agreement with the operator
because government astronauts do not
waive claims.
In response to Blue Origin’s comment
that government astronauts should
receive the same mission information
and opportunity to discuss that
information with the operator, the FAA
notes that the fact that there is not a
regulatory requirement for government
astronauts to sign an informed consent
form does not preclude operators from
providing information to and speaking
with government astronauts. An
operator may inform a government
astronaut about the unique risks and
safety record of the vehicle, but the FAA
will not require a government
astronaut’s signature on an informed
consent agreement.
D. Moving Waiver of Claims Templates
to an AC
This rule finalizes the proposal to
move the templates for waiver of claims
in appendix B through E of part 440 to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Sep 18, 2024
Jkt 262001
a separate advisory circular and adds
language to clarify that these templates
are approved by the FAA and may be
used to meet the requirements in
§ 440.17.
SpaceX disagreed with moving the
templates to a separate advisory
circular. Specifically, SpaceX noted that
the inclusion of cross-waivers in the
part 440 appendices has streamlined
negotiations related to cross-waivers
between licensees or permittees and
customers and has therefore also
lessened FAA’s burden to review crosswaiver submissions to ensure
compliance with the regulations.
SpaceX stated that although the current
language of § 440.17 allows for
submission of a ‘‘form that otherwise
provides all the same obligations and
benefits’’ as the cross-waivers contained
in the part 440 appendices, as a
practical matter, licensees simply
submit the cross-waiver forms contained
in the appendices. SpaceX emphasized
that moving the sample forms out of an
appendix into a separate advisory
circular will be confusing to less
frequent signers of cross-waivers and
will encourage more negotiation
between the licensee or permittee and
the individuals or entities required to
sign cross-waivers. SpaceX noted that
any such negotiation that results in
changes to the cross-waiver language
will then add to the FAA’s burden by
requiring the FAA to spend additional
time reviewing the submission to ensure
compliance with § 440.17.
Sierra Space commented that the
language proposed in § 440.17 could
potentially be read to imply that the
Administrator must approve the form
used for the waivers in each case. Sierra
Space recommended rewording the
language in § 440.17 to clarify that
review or approval by the Administrator
is not required if a licensee adopts the
language already set forth in a template
published by the FAA.
An individual commented that they
support the FAA’s proposal to move the
cross-waiver templates to an advisory
circular because the templates are
merely examples of how to meet a
regulation and are not themselves
regulatory.
This rule moves the waiver of claims
templates from the part 440 appendices
to an advisory circular because these
templates are not regulatory, but simply
examples, and moving them to an
advisory circular provides greater
flexibility to update or revise as needed.
These templates are provided to assist
operators with meeting the reciprocal
waiver of claims requirements but are
not the only means by which an
operator may meet those requirements.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
They are, therefore, more appropriately
located in an advisory circular. SpaceX
and Sierra Space commented that the
language in the NPRM’s proposed
§ 440.17 was not clear that the waiver of
claims forms in the advisory circular
would be acceptable and approved by
the FAA without the need for additional
legal review, unless modified.
Therefore, the FAA is revising the
language in § 440.17 to state: ‘‘The
reciprocal waiver of claims must be in
a form acceptable to the Administrator,
such as those contained in advisory
circular AC 440.17–1.’’ This change will
clarify that the reciprocal waiver of
claims templates found in AC 4401.17–
1, or any future updates, are acceptable
to the FAA and may be used to meet the
requirements in § 440.17.
E. Government Astronauts on Permitted
Operations
The final rule would not prohibit
government astronauts from being
onboard during permitted operations.4
Some commenters questioned whether
government astronauts would ever be
part of a permitted operation.
Ascendant Spaceflight Services
(Ascendant) commented that the FAA
should delete references to ‘‘government
astronaut’’ in permitted operations
because suborbital vehicles in the
development or experimental phase
would not be carrying government
astronauts. Rather, those vehicles would
only be carrying crew. Ascendant
asserted that experimental permit
human space flight requirements in
§ 437.5 only apply to crew.
The FAA does not agree. While
§ 437.5 does identify launch or reentry
for the purpose of crew training as
eligible for an experimental permit,
§ 437.5(b) states that eligibility for a
permit also includes a showing of
compliance with requirements for
obtaining a license. An operator may
choose to conduct an operation with
government astronauts on board under
an experimental permit to demonstrate
compliance with a requirement to
obtain a license. Although no
government astronauts have flown on a
permitted vehicle to date, it is possible
they might in the future to train for a
licensed mission.
F. Tracking Astronaut Training
Requirements
The final rule revises proposed
§ 460.59(d)(1) to require operators
ensure government astronaut training is
up to date by incorporating lessons
4 Permitted operations are operations conducted
in accordance with 14 CFR part 437 Experimental
Permits.
E:\FR\FM\19SER1.SGM
19SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 182 / Thursday, September 19, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
learned from training and operational
missions by providing traceability to
revisions or changes. The proposed rule
would have required operators to track
each revision of the training plan and
update training in writing.
The FAA received two comments on
this issue. ALPA supported the FAA’s
proposals requiring operators to track
and update the training of government
astronauts. SpaceX, however,
recommended providing more
flexibility for tracking changes to
training. SpaceX explained that it
utilizes a sophisticated change control
system to track updates to training and
suggested revising proposed
§ 460.59(d)(1) to require an operator to
update the government astronaut
training continually to ensure the
training incorporates lessons learned
from training and operational missions
by providing traceability to revisions or
changes.
The FAA agrees with SpaceX’s
suggested change. Proposed
§ 460.59(d)(1) would require all
revisions to training to be tracked in
written form. The FAA finds that
SpaceX’s recommended change would
provide FAA with sufficient compliance
insight through traceability, which
meets the intent of the FAA’s initial
proposed § 460.59(d)(1), while also
permitting operators to use modern
electronic systems. The FAA adopts
SpaceX’s proposed language in the final
rule.
G. Environmental Controls
This rule finalizes the proposal to
require operators to establish
environmental controls for operations
involving government astronauts with a
safety-critical role because, as with
crew, the FAA found that government
astronauts would likewise need to be
protected from atmospheric conditions
and receive training that is necessary for
the safety of the public on the ground,
in air, and in space.
The FAA received two comments on
this issue. An individual questioned
whether environmental controls referred
to life support systems or environmental
impacts. Environmental controls in
these regulations do refer to life support
systems. SpaceX commented that
humidity is not a safety-critical metric
of determining suitable atmospheric
conditions for human beings and that
compared to other conditions listed
within the subparts to § 460.61,
humidity is an outlier given that it is not
a direct risk to life and consciousness.
The FAA retains humidity in
§ 460.61(a)(2) in the final rule. The FAA
notes that while very high humidity
environments could influence core body
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Sep 18, 2024
Jkt 262001
temperature, the time high humidity
would take to cause an impact would be
much longer than impacts from pressure
and temperature changes in the
inhabited area of a vehicle. However, if
a flight crew depended on visual
information through a window,
humidity control would be necessary to
avoid windows fogging and
condensation that can hinder a pilot’s
vision and could therefore impact
public safety.
H. Use of the Term ‘‘Human Beings’’
In this rule, the FAA replaces the
proposed term ‘‘human beings’’ with the
defined terms ‘‘space flight participant,’’
‘‘crew,’’ and ‘‘government astronaut’’
where appropriate. In the NPRM, the
FAA proposed to use the term ‘‘human
being’’ to encompass all three categories
of persons who can currently be carried
on board a vehicle: government
astronaut, space flight participant, and
crew.
The FAA received two comments on
this issue. Sierra Space commented that
the NPRM’s use of the term ‘‘human
beings’’ could potentially lead
individuals, lawmakers, courts, and
licensees to incorrectly assume that
there is some other category of humans
who may be present on board licensed
operations besides those that have
already been defined (space flight
participants, crew, and government
astronauts). Sierra Space stated that the
FAA should remove the use of ‘‘human
beings’’ and instead revert to listing
each category of individuals to which
the language applies. An individual
similarly commented that the
classification of non-astronaut workers
as ‘‘human beings’’ is an unnecessary
classification that would only
overcomplicate future requirements on
these workers.
The FAA finds that using the term
‘‘human beings’’ could cause
unnecessary confusion among
stakeholders and therefore is removing
that term in the final rule. Instead, the
FAA is replacing ‘‘human beings’’ with
the defined terms ‘‘space flight
participant,’’ ‘‘crew,’’ and ‘‘government
astronaut’’ where appropriate.
I. Aeronautical Knowledge Requirement
This rule finalizes proposed
§ 460.59(b)(3), which requires an
operator to ensure any government
astronaut with a safety-critical role
possesses aeronautical knowledge,
experience, and skills necessary to pilot
and control the launch or reentry
vehicle that will operate in the National
Airspace System (NAS). The regulation
specifies that aeronautical experience
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
76719
may include hours in flight, ratings, and
training.
SpaceX commented that proposed
§ 460.59(b)(3) would transfer an existing
requirement onto operators to ensure
government astronauts are trained, and
that NASA should continue to hold this
responsibility and set forth any
requirements it deems suitable for
designated astronauts as set forth in 51
U.S.C. 50902(4). To support its position,
SpaceX noted that the training
requirement is tailored to winged
vehicles rather than fully automated
capsules, such as its Crew Dragon,
which are not maneuverable during
launch and reentry, and which utilize
Notices to Air Missions and Notices to
Mariners to remove the need for inflight and real-time coordination within
airspace. SpaceX therefore found that
the aeronautical knowledge, including
hours in aircraft flight, required by
proposed § 460.59(b)(3) is irrelevant to
safe vehicle operation and
recommended that FAA remove this
requirement as overly prescriptive and
inapplicable.
The FAA disagrees that proposed
§ 460.59(b)(3) should be removed from
the final rule. The requirement for
aeronautical knowledge only applies to
government astronauts who have the
capability to control, in real time, a
launch or reentry vehicle’s flight path
during a phase of flight capable of
endangering the public. The
requirement is not a blanket
requirement for all government
astronauts. Autonomous vehicles where
government astronauts do not have any
input for phases of flight going through
the NAS would not need to comply with
this requirement as such aeronautical
knowledge, experience, and skills
would not be necessary. Any NASA
requirement for aeronautical knowledge
for government astronauts that pilot a
vehicle is not redundant because it can
be used to demonstrate compliance with
the FAA requirement.
J. Permit Eligibility
This rule finalizes the proposal to
replace the term ‘‘reusable suborbital
rocket’’ with ‘‘reusable suborbital
vehicle’’ in § 437.5. It also finalizes the
proposal to remove the term ‘‘new’’
from § 437.5(a) to allow research and
development of existing design
concepts, equipment, or operating
techniques, consistent with the CSLCA.
Ascendant commented that
experimental permits should not be
limited to suborbital launch vehicles.
Ascendant stated that there is no
difference in risk to the public between
any experimental launch or reentry
vehicle, suborbital or orbital, which
E:\FR\FM\19SER1.SGM
19SER1
76720
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 182 / Thursday, September 19, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
does not carry commercial payloads and
paid occupants. Ascendant noted that
the limited applicability of experimental
permits places additional burden on
developers of orbital or expendable
suborbital vehicles which require
licenses before test flight can begin.
Ascendant also asked for clarification
regarding whether the training
referenced in § 437.5 refers to training
crew in flight to operate a licensed
vehicle, or training crew to operate a
vehicle for which a license would be
issued (for example, to complete
integrated testing with humans).
The training referenced in § 437.5
refers to training crew in flight to
operate a licensed vehicle. The FAA’s
statutory authority to issue experimental
permits only applies to suborbital
vehicles, and therefore the FAA does
not have the authority to expand the
applicability of experimental permits to
any orbital vehicles. Title 51 U.S.C.
50906 states that the Secretary may
issue a permit only for reusable
suborbital rockets or reusable launch
vehicles that will be launched into a
suborbital trajectory or reentered under
that permit solely for research and
development to test design concepts,
equipment, or operating techniques;
showing compliance with requirements
as part of the process for obtaining a
license under this chapter; or crew
training for a launch or reentry using the
design of the rocket or vehicle for which
the permit would be issued. The FAA is
only expanding eligibility to launch or
reentry vehicles on a suborbital
trajectory to align with the CSLCA.
Therefore, the FAA will not expand the
applicability of experimental permits to
any orbital vehicles.
K. Government Astronauts on Foreign
Vehicles
This rule defines ‘‘government
astronaut’’ to match the statutory
definition and provides regulatory
clarity to applicants seeking FAA
licenses for space flight operations
involving government astronauts.
An individual commented that it may
be beneficial to acknowledge U.S.
government astronauts flying on board
international partner spacecraft and
international launch providers. The
individual noted that the International
Space Station (ISS) currently uses Soyuz
vehicles from Russia and that there
could be advances in vehicles from ESA
and JAXA, for example.
The FAA does not license foreign
launch or reentry vehicles that are
launching or reentering outside the U.S.,
and therefore addressing government
astronauts flying on board foreign
spacecraft that launch or reenter outside
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Sep 18, 2024
Jkt 262001
the U.S. is outside the scope of the
FAA’s regulatory authority and this
rulemaking.
characterized as a space flight
participant rather than an international
partner astronaut.
L. Clarification on the Role of
International Partner Astronauts
This rule defines an ‘‘International
partner astronaut’’ as an individual
designated under Article 11 of the
International Space Station
Intergovernmental Agreement, by a
partner to that agreement other than the
U.S., as qualified to serve as an ISS crew
member. This definition was taken
directly from the CSLCA.
Sierra Space encouraged the FAA to
further clarify the role of international
partner astronauts, including clarifying
who would not qualify as an
international partner astronaut. Sierra
Space stated that since the NPRM’s
definition of ‘‘international partner
astronaut’’ applies only to astronauts
contributed by ISS partner states who
are crewmembers on board the ISS, the
term would not apply to international
astronauts from non-partner states, nor
would it apply to any international
astronaut serving missions unrelated to
the ISS. Sierra Space concluded that all
such individuals would be considered
space flight participants under the
proposed regulations and would
therefore be subject to the waiver and
informed consent requirements
applicable to space flight participants.
Sierra Space noted that there may be
cases in which foreign governments may
be unwilling to allow or require their
employees to enter the waivers of claims
required of space flight participants, or
to personally assume the risk of human
space flight operations as required by
the informed consent regime. Sierra
Space stated that the FAA should
consider granting latitude to operators
carrying astronauts from foreign
countries by waiving informed consent
and individual waiver requirements,
especially if those countries have
sufficiently mature astronaut training
programs and are willing to accept
financial responsibility for claims
brought by their employees.
The FAA is adopting the statutory
definition of international partner
astronaut. The FAA realizes that the
statutory definition only applies to ISS
partner astronauts. Any foreign
astronaut who does not meet the
definition of international partner
astronaut would be considered a space
flight participant under FAA regulations
and would have to comply with space
flight participant regulations. An
operator may request a waiver to the
waiver of claims requirement for space
flight participants for those instances in
which a foreign astronaut is
M. Training of Space Flight Participants
for Safety Critical Roles
SpaceX commented that, in the
interest of public safety and the safety
of those on board launch and reentry
vehicles, the FAA should update the
final rule to reflect in its regulations that
space flight participants should be
trained appropriately to conduct
potentially lifesaving functions during
an emergency to protect both
themselves and the public, including
operating a vehicle during launch or
reentry in a manner to protect public
safety. SpaceX noted that the definitions
for crew, government astronaut, and
space flight participant within 51 U.S.C.
50902 were developed at a time when
Congress anticipated all crewed vehicles
to be operated either by crew or by
government astronauts. However,
SpaceX noted that while the statute
provides training for crew and
government astronauts, missions that
have only had space flight participants
on board have occurred for both orbital
and suborbital systems. Furthermore,
SpaceX stated that the statutory
definition of space flight participants,
defined in 51 U.S.C. 50902 to be any
person that is not crew or a government
astronaut, does not prohibit the FAA
from requiring an operator to train space
flight participants to operate a vehicle
during launch or reentry. SpaceX
concluded that, therefore, the FAA
should revise its regulations to allow an
operator to train space flight
participants to operate a vehicle during
launch or reentry because the
underlying statute does not prohibit
space flight participant training.
Sierra Space similarly commented
that the FAA should adopt common
requirements for training which apply
to any passenger or remote operator in
a safety critical role, regardless of how
that individual is classified under the
regulations. Sierra Space stated these
common requirements should clarify
what constitutes a ‘‘safety-critical role’’
to limit the definition to those
individuals who are essential to
ensuring that the vehicle operates in
real time to ensure public safety.
In the NPRM, the FAA did not
propose to add training requirements for
space flight participants. The FAA
explained that whereas the definition of
crew in title 51 expressly acknowledges
a crew member’s ability to perform
activities directly relating to operation
of the vehicle, the definition of space
flight participant contains no express
authority to do so. Furthermore, current
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\19SER1.SGM
19SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 182 / Thursday, September 19, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
crew qualification and training
requirements include a demonstration
of the ability to withstand the stresses
of space in sufficient condition to safely
carry out duties so the vehicle will not
harm the public. Each crew member
with a safety-critical role is also
required to possess and carry an FAA
second-class medical certificate.
Similarly, government astronauts who
perform a safety-critical role must be
trained to carry out that role because it
may affect the safety of the public. An
operator may choose to train space flight
participants to conduct potentially
lifesaving functions during an
emergency to protect themselves,
however, the regulations do not require
this training because it is not necessary
to protect public safety.
The FAA has already addressed
training requirements for those missions
that only have space flight participants
onboard. Under § 460.51, an operator
must train each space flight participant
before flight on how to respond to
emergency situations, including smoke,
fire, loss of cabin pressure, and
emergency exits. An operator may also
provide mission-specific training to
space flight participants for missions
without crew or government astronauts.
The FAA therefore finds that the
training required by § 460.51 is
sufficient to satisfy missions with only
space flight participants on board.
N. Use of ANSI Standard for Human
Spaceflight Ontology
This rule updates definitions relating
to commercial space launch and reentry
vehicles and occupants to reflect current
legislative definitions.
Both the Space Infrastructure
Foundation (SIF) and an individual
commented that the FAA should use
terms identified in AIAA/ANSI S–153
2021 Human Spaceflight: Spacecraft
Architecture and Systems Engineering
Ontology Standard (S–153) in its
applicable commercial space
regulations.
SIF stated that because the National
Technology Transfer Advancement Act
(NTTAA) compels government
organizations to adopt industry
standards developed under a voluntary
consensus process, and failure to do so
must be justified to Congress on a caseby-case basis, the FAA should use the
standards identified in S–153. An
individual stated that S–153 is critical
for U.S. commercial spaceflight because
it establishes the baseline of the
ontology, streamlines interdisciplinary
communication, and enables strategic
planning, and the FAA should consider
S–153’s integration into the current
rulemaking.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Sep 18, 2024
Jkt 262001
The FAA does not adopt S–153 into
its regulations because the updated
definitions are required by Congress to
reflect current legislative definitions in
51 U.S. Code 50902. Furthermore, the
terminology in S–153 does not align
with the purpose of this rulemaking
because the terminology in S–153
focuses on human spaceflight spacecraft
from an architectural and system
engineering perspective, rather than on
the statutorily required definitions the
FAA must incorporate into its
regulations.
O. Transparency of MPL Methodology
An individual commented that
publishing the MPL methodology would
provide greater transparency and reduce
uncertainty for commercial space
businesses, insurance companies, and
investors. The commenter noted that
this transparency would pose no risks to
national security and that publishing
the MPL methodology in an AC would
not require notice and comment for
modification. The commenter
recommended amending § 440.7(a) or
(b) to include that the method for
determining MPL is set forth in an AC.
The scope of this rulemaking is to
codify current statutory requirements
mandated by the CSLCA. The FAA finds
that providing MPL methodology in an
AC is beyond the scope of the
rulemaking because it is not a change
required by the CSLCA, and this final
rule does not pertain to MPL
methodology.
P. Commercial Use of Asteroid or Space
Resources
Space Law & Policy Solutions noted
that the CSLCA contains a provision in
title IV which authorizes U.S. citizens to
perform non-governmental space
activities aimed at the recovery,
possession, ownership, use, and sale of
asteroid or space resources. Space Law
& Policy Solutions noted that the NPRM
does not mention title IV nor its
enactment in 51 U.S.C. 51303 and asked
the FAA a series of related questions.
Such questions included (i) why space
resources are not mentioned in the
NPRM; (ii) whether the FAA deems title
IV of the CSLCA as providing the FAA
with congressional authority to license
space resource activities and if so,
whether an amendment is required to its
regulations; (iii) whether the FAA
deems itself the proper Article VI
authorizing agency to review and
license a space resource activity; and
(iv) whether the FAA believes it
requires additional authority from
Congress to include on orbit authority to
oversee space resource activities. Space
Law & Policy Solutions noted that it
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
76721
understands its questions are beyond
the scope of the FAA’s request in the
NPRM, but that the FAA should address
the lack of clarity on the licensing and
implementation of space resources.
The FAA does not have statutory
authority to regulate space resources,
and the commenter’s questions are out
of scope for the current rulemaking.
V. Regulatory Notices and Analyses
Federal agencies consider impacts of
regulatory actions under a variety of
Executive orders and other
requirements. First, Executive Order
12866, Executive Order 13563, and
Executive Order 14094 (‘‘Modernizing
Regulatory Review’’), direct that each
Federal agency shall propose or adopt a
regulation only upon a reasoned
determination that the benefits of the
intended regulation justify the 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. 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 that may result in the
expenditure by State, local, and Tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100 million or more
(adjusted annually for inflation) in any
one year. The current threshold after
adjustment for inflation is $183 million
using the most current (2023) Implicit
Price Deflator for the Gross Domestic
Product.
In conducting these analyses, the FAA
has determined that this rule: will result
in benefits that justify costs; is not a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ as
defined in section 3(f) of Executive
Order 12866, as amended; will not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities;
will not create unnecessary obstacles to
the foreign commerce of the United
States; and will not impose an unfunded
mandate on State, local, or Tribal
governments, or on the private sector.
A. Regulatory Impact Analysis
This rule amends 14 CFR parts 401,
413, 415, 431, 435, 437, 440, 450, and
460 by incorporating statutory changes
resulting from the CSLCA. This rule
adds a definition for ‘‘government
astronaut’’ and updates other definitions
to account for that addition. This rule
also updates financial responsibility
E:\FR\FM\19SER1.SGM
19SER1
76722
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 182 / Thursday, September 19, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
requirements in part 440 to exclude
government astronauts from the
definitions of ‘‘third party’’ and adds
space flight participants to the
insurance requirements in § 440.9.
Templates for reciprocal waiver of
claims agreements are moved from part
440 appendices B through E to an AC.
This rule also adds two new subparts to
part 460 to address operator
requirements for government astronauts
playing safety-critical and non-safetycritical roles during launches and
reentries. In addition, the FAA replaces
the terms ‘‘crew’’ and ‘‘space flight
participant’’ with ‘‘crew, space flight
participant, or government astronaut’’ in
§§ 415.8, 431.8, and 435.8 for applicants
seeking a license for operations
involving human space flight and that
must demonstrate compliance with
human space flight requirements. This
change accommodates the creation of
the government astronaut category in
part 460.
This rule affects all U.S. commercial
space operators and launches and
reentries licensed under 14 CFR parts
401, 413, 415, 431, 435, 437, 440, 450,
and 460 that will carry a government
astronaut on board. Table 1 details the
changes in each part.
There are no changes in the final rule
from the proposed rule that notably
change the analysis presented for the
proposed rule.
TABLE 1—CHANGES BY SECTION
Section
Change
§ 401.5 Definitions ........................................................
Add definitions for ‘‘Government Astronaut,’’ ‘‘International partner astronaut,’’ and ‘‘International
Space Station Intergovernmental Agreement.’’ Revising definitions for ‘‘Human space flight incident,’’
‘‘Launch,’’ ‘‘Launch accident,’’ ‘‘Reenter,’’ ‘‘Reentry
accident,’’ and ‘‘Space flight participant’’.
Add definitions for ‘‘Government Astronaut,’’ ‘‘International partner astronaut,’’ and ‘‘International
Space Station Intergovernmental Agreement.’’ Revising definition for ‘‘Space flight participant’’.
Replace the term ‘‘rocket’’ with the term ‘‘vehicle’’ to
align with the increase in scope from § 437.3.
§ 401.7 Definitions ........................................................
§ 413.3(f) .......................................................................
§ 415.8 Human Space Flight in Part 415, LAUNCH LICENSE.
§ 431.8 Human Space Flight in Part 431, LAUNCH
AND REENTRY OF A REUSABLE LAUNCH VEHICLE (RLV).
§ 435.8 Human Space Flight in Part 435, REENTRY
OF A REENTRY VEHICLE OTHER THAN A REUSABLE LAUNCH VEHICLE (RLV).
§ 437.3 Definitions in Part 437, EXPERIMENTAL
PERMITS.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
§§ 437.5, 437.7, 437.9, 437.21, 437.23, 437.25,
437.31, 437.33, 437.53, 437.57, 437.59, 437.61,
437.71, 437.85., 437.91, and 437.95.
Effect of change
Replace ‘‘flight crew or a space flight participant’’ with
‘‘a space flight participant, crew, or government astronaut.’’ Add sections 460.59, 460.61, and 460.67
to the list of sections with which an applicant proposing to conduct a launch with a space flight participant, crew, or government astronaut on board
must demonstrate compliance.
Replace ‘‘flight crew or a space flight participant’’ with
‘‘a space flight participant, crew, or government astronaut.’’ Add sections 460.59, 460.61, and 460.67
to the list of sections with which an applicant proposing to conduct a launch with a space flight participant, crew, or government astronaut on board
must demonstrate compliance.
Replace ‘‘flight crew or a space flight participant’’ with
‘‘a space flight participant, crew, or government astronaut.’’ Add sections 460.59, 460.61, and 460.67
to the list of sections with which an applicant proposing to conduct a launch with a space flight participant, crew, or government astronaut on board
must demonstrate compliance.
Replaced suborbital rocket with suborbital vehicle in
the definitions for ‘‘envelope expansion’’, ‘‘exclusion area’’, and ‘‘reentry impact point’’. Updated
the definition of ‘‘permitted vehicle’’ to include reusable launch vehicles that are launched on a suborbital trajectory or are reentered. Updated the definition of ‘‘permitted vehicle’’ to add that it includes
‘‘a reusable launch vehicle that will be launched
into a suborbital trajectory or reentered from a suborbital trajectory’’.
Replace ‘‘suborbital rocket’’ with ‘‘reusable suborbital
vehicle’’.
§ 437.5(a) ......................................................................
Remove ‘‘new’’ to allow research and development of
existing design concepts, equipment, or operating
techniques.
§ 437.21(b)(3) ...............................................................
Replace ‘‘flight crew or a space flight participant’’ with
‘‘a space flight participant, crew, or government astronaut.’’ Add sections 460.59, 460.61, and 460.67
to the list of sections with which an applicant proposing to conduct a launch with a space flight participant, crew, or government astronaut on board
must demonstrate compliance.
......................................................................................
Move appendices B–E in part 440, FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY, to an AC..
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Sep 18, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
None. The FAA has been applying these definitions
in accordance with the statute since the CSLCA
went into effect. This change provides regulatory
clarity.
None. The FAA has been applying these definitions
in accordance with the statute since the CSLCA
went into effect. This change provides regulatory
clarity.
None. The FAA has been applying these definitions
in accordance with the statute since the CSLCA
went into effect. This change provides regulatory
clarity.
None. The FAA has been applying these requirements to government astronauts in accordance
with the statute since the CSLCA went into effect.
This change provides regulatory clarity.
None. The FAA has been applying these requirements to government astronauts in accordance
with the statute since the CSLCA went into effect.
This change provides regulatory clarity.
None. The FAA has been applying these requirements to government astronauts in accordance
with the statute since the CSLCA went into effect.
This change provides regulatory clarity.
None. The FAA has been applying these definitions
in accordance with the statute since the CSLCA
went into effect. This change provides regulatory
clarity.
None. The FAA has been applying these definitions
in accordance with the statute since the CSLCA
went into effect. This change provides regulatory
clarity.
None. The FAA has been applying these definitions
in accordance with the statute since the CSLCA
went into effect. This change provides regulatory
clarity.
None. The FAA has been applying these requirements to government astronauts in accordance
with the statute since the CSLCA went into effect.
This change provides regulatory clarity.
None.
E:\FR\FM\19SER1.SGM
19SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 182 / Thursday, September 19, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
76723
TABLE 1—CHANGES BY SECTION—Continued
Section
Change
Effect of change
§ 440.3 ..........................................................................
Revise definition of permit and permitted activity. Exclude government astronaut from losses to government personnel in the definition of ‘‘MPL’’’’. Exclude government astronaut from the definition of
‘‘Third party’’.
§ 440.9(b) ......................................................................
Add space flight participants to the list in which a licensee or permittee must obtain and maintain in
effect a policy or policies of liability insurance to
protect their respective potential liabilities against
covered claims by a third party for bodily injury or
property damage resulting from a licensed or permitted activity.
Add language to require the licensee or permittee to
enter into a reciprocal waiver of claims agreement,
in a form acceptable to the Administrator such as
those contained in advisory circular AC 440.17–1,
with each space flight participant.
Add requirement for reciprocal waiver of claims between operators and space flight participants as
section (f). Move current section (f) to section (g).
None. Updates to the definition of permit and permitted activity align statue with current practice.
Excluding government astronaut from third party
means that they are not included in MPL calculations and are prevented from making claims as
third parties in alignment with current practice.
Government astronauts that are employed by the
US government would be covered by insurance required under § 440.9(b) because they are government personnel.
None. The FAA has been requiring the addition of
space flight participants to the insurance requirements with operators in accordance with the statute since the CSLCA went into effect. This change
provides regulatory clarity.
§ 440.17(c), (d), and (e) ................................................
§ 440.17(f) and (g) ........................................................
§ 450.45(e)(3)(ii)(E) Human Space Flight in part 450 ..
Replace ‘‘rocket’s’’ with ‘‘vehicle’s’’ .............................
§ 450.45(e)(5) ...............................................................
Replace ‘‘flight crew or a space flight participant’’ with
‘‘a space flight participant, crew, or government astronaut.’’ Add sections 460.59, 460.61, and 460.67
to the list of sections with which an applicant proposing to conduct a launch with a space flight participant, crew, or government astronaut on board
must demonstrate compliance.
Add requirements applicable to government astronauts with a safety-critical role.
Add Subpart C, Launch and Reentry with a Government Astronaut With a Safety-Critical Role, after
Subpart B in § 460 Scope, HUMAN SPACE
FLIGHT REQUIREMENTS.
Add Subpart D, Launch and Reentry with a Government Astronaut Without a Safety-Critical Role after
Subpart C in § 460 Scope, HUMAN SPACE
FLIGHT REQUIREMENTS.
These changes will have a minimal
impact on licensed commercial space
activity with government astronauts
because the changes align regulations
with the current statutory requirements
for crew, for space flight participants,
and with current practices. The FAA
has been applying the statutory changes
since they went into effect in 2015.
Since this rule codifies these current
practices, there is effectively no change
from the baseline without the rule and,
therefore, no measurable resulting
benefits or costs.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
of 1980, (5 U.S.C. 601–612), as amended
by the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub.
L. 104–121) and the Small Business Jobs
Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111–240), requires
Federal agencies to consider the effects
of the regulatory action on small
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Sep 18, 2024
Jkt 262001
Add requirements applicable to government astronauts without a safety-critical role.
business and other small entities and to
minimize any significant economic
impact. The term ‘‘small entities’’
comprises small businesses and not-forprofit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and
are not dominant in their fields, and
governmental jurisdictions with
populations of less than 50,000.
This rule updates definitions relating
to commercial space launch and reentry
vehicles and occupants to reflect current
statutory definitions and requirements,
as well as implements clarifications to
financial responsibility requirements in
accordance with the CSLCA. The FAA
has been applying the statutory changes
since they went into effect in 2015.
Since this rule codifies these current
practices, the FAA certifies that this rule
will not result in a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
None. The FAA has been requiring reciprocal waiver
of claims in accordance with existing regulations.
This change provides regulatory flexibility by moving the templates from regulatory language to an
advisory circular.
None. The FAA has been requiring reciprocal waiver
of claims between operators and space flight participants in accordance with the statute since the
CSLCA went into effect. This change provides regulatory clarity. Current section (f) is moved to section (g) without changes to accommodate the addition of section (f).
None. The FAA has been applying these definitions
in accordance with the statute since the CSLCA
went into effect. This change provides regulatory
clarity.
None. The FAA has been applying these requirements in accordance with the statute since the
CSLCA went into effect. This change provides regulatory clarity.
None. Operators have been training government astronauts in order to satisfy NASA contractual requirements. This change makes some of that training required by regulation.
None. Operators have been training government astronauts in order to satisfy NASA contractual requirements. This change makes some of that training required by regulation.
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
E:\FR\FM\19SER1.SGM
19SER1
76724
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 182 / Thursday, September 19, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
the potential effects of this rule and
determined that it will not create
unnecessary obstacles to the foreign
commerce of the United States.
D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) governs
the issuance of Federal regulations that
require unfunded mandates. An
unfunded mandate is a regulation that
requires a State, local, or Tribal
government or the private sector to
incur direct costs without the Federal
Government having first provided the
funds to pay those costs. The FAA
determined that this final rule will not
result in the expenditure of $183
million or more by State, local, or Tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or the
private sector, in any one year.
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.
F. 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 (NEPA) in the
absence of extraordinary circumstances.
The FAA has determined this
rulemaking action qualifies for the
categorical exclusion identified in
paragraph 5–6.6f for regulations and
involves no extraordinary
circumstances.
VI. Executive Order Determinations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
The FAA has analyzed this final rule
under the principles and criteria of
Executive Order (E.O.) 13132,
Federalism. The FAA 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 13175, Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
Consistent with Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Sep 18, 2024
Jkt 262001
with Indian Tribal Governments,5 and
FAA Order 1210.20, American Indian
and Alaska Native Tribal Consultation
Policy and Procedures,6 the FAA
ensures that Federally Recognized
Tribes (Tribes) are given the opportunity
to provide meaningful and timely input
regarding proposed Federal actions that
have the potential to have substantial
direct effects on one or more Indian
Tribes, on the relationship between the
Federal Government and Indian Tribes,
or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian Tribes; or to
affect uniquely or significantly their
respective Tribes. At this point, the FAA
has not identified any unique or
significant effects, environmental or
otherwise, on Tribes resulting from this
final rule.
C. Executive Order 13211, Regulations
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
The FAA analyzed this final rule
under E.O. 13211, Actions Concerning
Regulations that Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
(May 18, 2001). The FAA has
determined that it is not a ‘‘significant
energy action’’ under the Executive
order and is not likely to have a
significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy.
D. Executive Order 13609, Promoting
International Regulatory 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.
VII. Additional Information
A. Electronic Access and Filing
A copy of the NPRM, all comments
received, this final rule, and all
background material may be viewed
online at www.regulations.gov using the
docket number listed above. A copy of
this final rule will be placed in the
docket. Electronic retrieval help and
guidelines are available on the website.
It is available 24 hours each day, 365
days each year. An electronic copy of
5 65
FR 67249 (Nov. 6, 2000).
6 FAA Order No. 1210.20 (Jan. 28, 2004), available
at www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/1210.pdf.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
this document may also be downloaded
from the Office of the Federal Register’s
website at www.federalregister.gov and
the Government Publishing Office’s
website at www.govinfo.gov. A copy
may also be found at the FAA’s
Regulations and Policies website at
www.faa.gov/regulations_policies.
Copies may also be obtained by
sending a request to the Federal
Aviation Administration, Office of
Rulemaking, ARM–1, 800 Independence
Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591, or
by calling (202) 267–9677. Commenters
must identify the docket or notice
number of this rulemaking.
All documents the FAA considered in
developing this final rule, including
economic analyses and technical
reports, may be accessed in the
electronic docket for this rulemaking.
B. Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act
The Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of
1996 requires the 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
www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/
rulemaking/sbre_act/.
List of Subjects
14 CFR Part 401
Organization and functions
(Government agencies), Space
transportation and exploration.
14 CFR Part 413
Confidential business information,
Space transportation and exploration.
14 CFR Part 415
Aviation safety, Environmental
protection, Investigations, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Space
transportation and exploration.
14 CFR Part 431
Launch and reentry safety, Aviation
safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Rockets, Space
transportation and exploration.
14 CFR Part 435
Launch and reentry safety, Aviation
safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Rockets, Space
transportation and exploration.
E:\FR\FM\19SER1.SGM
19SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 182 / Thursday, September 19, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
14 CFR Part 437
Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Space
transportation and exploration.
14 CFR Part 440
Indemnity payments, Insurance,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Space transportation and
exploration.
14 CFR Part 450
Aircraft, Aviation safety,
Environmental protection,
Investigations, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Space
transportation and exploration.
14 CFR Part 460
Aircraft, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Space transportation and
exploration.
The Amendments
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends chapter III of
title 14, Code of Federal Regulations as
follows:
PART 401—ORGANIZATION AND
DEFINITIONS
1. The authority citation for part 401
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 51 U.S.C. 50901–50923.
2. Amend § 401.5 by:
a. Adding definitions in alphabetical
order for ‘‘Government astronaut’’,
‘‘International partner astronaut’’, and
‘‘International Space Station
Intergovernmental Agreement’’; and
■ b. Revising the definitions for
‘‘Human space flight incident’’,
‘‘Launch’’, ‘‘Launch accident’’,
‘‘Reenter; reentry’’, ‘‘Reentry accident’’,
and ‘‘Space Flight participant’’.
The additions and revisions read as
follows:
■
■
§ 401.5
Definitions.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
*
*
*
*
*
Government astronaut means an
individual who—
(1) Is designated by the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration
under Title 51, United States Code,
Section 20113(n);
(2) Is carried within a launch vehicle
or reentry vehicle in the course of their
employment, which may include
performance of activities directly
relating to the launch, reentry, or other
operation of the launch vehicle or
reentry vehicle; and
(3) Is either—
(i) An employee of the United States
Government, including the uniformed
services, engaged in the performance of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Sep 18, 2024
Jkt 262001
a Federal function under authority of
law or an Executive act; or
(ii) An international partner astronaut.
*
*
*
*
*
Human space flight incident means
an unplanned event that poses a high
risk of causing a serious or fatal injury
to a space flight participant, crew, or
government astronaut.
*
*
*
*
*
International partner astronaut means
an individual designated under Article
11 of the International Space Station
Intergovernmental Agreement, by a
partner to that agreement other than the
United States, as qualified to serve as an
International Space Station crew
member.
International Space Station
Intergovernmental Agreement means the
Agreement Concerning Cooperation on
the International Space Station, signed
in Washington, DC, on January 29, 1998
(TIAS 12927).
*
*
*
*
*
Launch means to place or try to place
a launch vehicle or reentry vehicle and
any payload, space flight participant,
crew, or government astronaut from
Earth in a suborbital trajectory, in Earth
orbit in outer space, or otherwise in
outer space, and includes preparing a
launch vehicle for flight at a launch site
in the United States. Launch includes
the flight of a launch vehicle and
includes pre- and post-flight ground
operations as follows:
(1) Beginning of launch. (i) Under a
license, launch begins with the arrival
of a launch vehicle or payload at a U.S.
launch site.
(ii) Under a permit, launch begins
when any pre-flight ground operation at
a U.S. launch site meets all of the
following criteria:
(A) Is closely proximate in time to
flight,
(B) Entails critical steps preparatory to
initiating flight,
(C) Is unique to space launch, and
(D) Is inherently so hazardous as to
warrant the FAA’s regulatory oversight.
(2) End of launch. (i) For launch of an
orbital expendable launch vehicle
(ELV), launch ends after the licensee’s
last exercise of control over its launch
vehicle.
(ii) For launch of an orbital reusable
launch vehicle (RLV) with a payload,
launch ends after deployment of the
payload. For any other orbital RLV,
launch ends upon completion of the
first sustained, steady-state orbit of an
RLV at its intended location.
(iii) For a suborbital ELV or RLV
launch, launch ends after reaching
apogee if the flight includes a reentry,
or otherwise after vehicle landing or
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
76725
impact on Earth, and after activities
necessary to return the vehicle to a safe
condition on the ground.
Launch accident means—
(1) An event that causes a fatality or
serious injury (as defined in 49 CFR
830.2) to any person who is not
associated with the flight;
(2) An event that causes damage
estimated to exceed $25,000 to property
not associated with the flight that is not
located at the launch site or designated
recovery area;
(3) An unplanned event occurring
during the flight of a launch vehicle
resulting in the impact of a launch
vehicle, its payload, or any component
thereof:
(i) For an expendable launch vehicle,
outside designated impact limit lines;
and
(ii) For a reusable launch vehicle,
outside a designated landing site.
(4) For a launch that takes place with
a person on board, a fatality or serious
injury to a space flight participant, crew,
or government astronaut.
*
*
*
*
*
Reenter; reentry means to return or
attempt to return, purposefully, a
reentry vehicle and its payload, space
flight participant, crew, or government
astronaut, if any, from Earth orbit or
from outer space to Earth. The term
‘‘reenter; reentry’’ includes activities
conducted in Earth orbit or outer space
to determine reentry readiness and that
are critical to ensuring public health
and safety and the safety of property
during reentry flight. The term ‘‘reenter;
reentry’’ also includes activities
conducted on the ground after vehicle
landing on Earth to ensure the reentry
vehicle does not pose a threat to public
health and safety or the safety of
property.
Reentry accident means—
(1) Any unplanned event occurring
during the reentry of a reentry vehicle
resulting in the impact of the reentry
vehicle, its payload, or any component
thereof, outside a designated reentry
site;
(2) An event that causes a fatality or
serious injury (as defined in 49 CFR
830.2) to any person who is not
associated with the reentry;
(3) An event that causes damage
estimated to exceed $25,000 to property
not associated with the reentry and not
located within a designated reentry site;
and
(4) For a reentry that takes place with
a person on board, a fatality or serious
injury to a space flight participant, crew,
or government astronaut.
*
*
*
*
*
Space flight participant means an
individual, who is not crew or a
E:\FR\FM\19SER1.SGM
19SER1
76726
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 182 / Thursday, September 19, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
government astronaut, carried on board
a launch vehicle or reentry vehicle.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3. Amend § 401.7 by:
■ a. Adding definitions in alphabetical
order for ‘‘Government astronaut’’,
‘‘International partner astronaut’’, and
‘‘International Space Station
Intergovernmental Agreement’’; and
■ b. Revising the definition for ‘‘Space
flight participant’’.
The additions and revision read as
follows:
§ 401.7
PART 437—EXPERIMENTAL PERMITS
*
■
*
*
*
*
(f) A person, individual, or foreign
entity otherwise requiring a license
under this section may instead obtain an
experimental permit to launch or
reenter a reusable suborbital vehicle
under part 437 of this chapter.
PART 415—LAUNCH LICENSE
6. The authority citation for part 415
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 51 U.S.C. 50901–50923.
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
Government astronaut means an
individual who—
(1) Is designated by the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration
under Title 51, United States Code,
Section 20113(n);
(2) Is carried within a launch vehicle
or reentry vehicle in the course of their
employment, which may include
performance of activities directly
relating to the launch, reentry, or other
operation of the launch vehicle or
reentry vehicle; and
(3) Is either—
(i) An employee of the United States
Government, including the uniformed
services, engaged in the performance of
a Federal function under authority of
law or an Executive act; or
(ii) An international partner astronaut.
*
*
*
*
*
International partner astronaut means
an individual designated under Article
11 of the International Space Station
Intergovernmental Agreement, by a
partner to that agreement other than the
United States, as qualified to serve as an
International Space Station crew
member.
International Space Station
Intergovernmental Agreement means the
Agreement Concerning Cooperation on
the International Space Station, signed
in Washington, DC, on January 29, 1998
(TIAS 12927).
*
*
*
*
*
Space flight participant means an
individual, who is not crew or a
government astronaut, carried on board
a launch vehicle or reentry vehicle.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 413—LICENSE APPLICATION
PROCEDURES
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
§ 413.3 Who must obtain a license or
permit.
4. The authority citation for part 413
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 51 U.S.C. 50901–50923.
5. Amend § 413.3 by revising
paragraph (f) to read as follows:
■
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Sep 18, 2024
Jkt 262001
■
7. Revise § 415.8 to read as follows:
§ 415.8
Human space flight.
To obtain a launch license, an
applicant proposing to conduct a launch
with a space flight participant, crew, or
government astronaut on board must
demonstrate compliance with §§ 460.5,
460.7, 460.11, 460.13, 460.15, 460.17,
460.51, 460.53, 460.59, 460.61, and
460.67 of this subchapter.
PART 431—LAUNCH AND REENTRY
OF A REUSABLE LAUNCH VEHICLE
(RLV)
8. The authority citation for part 431
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 51 U.S.C. 50901–50923.
■
9. Revise § 431.8 to read as follows:
§ 431.8
Human space flight.
To obtain a license, an applicant
proposing to conduct a reusable launch
vehicle mission with a space flight
participant, crew, or government
astronaut on board must demonstrate
compliance with §§ 460.5, 460.7,
460.11, 460.13, 460.15, 460.17, 460.51,
460.53, 460.59, 460.61, and 460.67 of
this subchapter.
PART 435—REENTRY OF A REENTRY
VEHICLE OTHER THAN A REUSABLE
LAUNCH VEHICLE (RLV)
10. The authority citation for part 435
continues to read as follows:
■
■
12. The authority citation for part 437
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 51 U.S.C. 50901–50923.
■
13. Revise § 437.3 to read as follows:
§ 437.3
Definitions.
Envelope expansion means any
portion of a flight where planned
operations will subject a reusable
suborbital vehicle to the effects of
altitude, velocity, acceleration, or burn
duration that exceed a level or duration
successfully verified during an earlier
flight.
Exclusion area means an area, within
an operating area, that a reusable
suborbital vehicle’s instantaneous
impact point may not traverse.
Operating area means a threedimensional region where permitted
flights may take place.
Permitted vehicle means a reusable
suborbital rocket or a reusable launch
vehicle that will be launched into a
suborbital trajectory or reentered that is
operated by a launch or reentry operator
under an experimental permit.
Reentry impact point means the
location of a reusable suborbital
vehicle’s instantaneous impact point
during its unpowered exoatmospheric
suborbital flight.
■ 14. Revise § 437.5 to read as follows:
§ 437.5 Eligibility for an experimental
permit.
The FAA will issue an experimental
permit to a person to launch or reenter
a reusable suborbital vehicle only for—
(a) Research and development to test
design concepts, equipment, or
operating techniques;
(b) A showing of compliance with
requirements for obtaining a license
under this subchapter; or
(c) Crew training for a launch or
reentry using the design of the reusable
suborbital vehicle for which the permit
would be issued.
■ 15. Amend § 437.7 by revising the
introductory text and paragraph (b) to
read as follows:
Authority: 51 U.S.C. 50901–50923.
§ 437.7
11. Revise § 435.8 to read as follows:
An experimental permit authorizes
launch or reentry of a reusable
suborbital vehicle. The authorization
includes pre- and post-flight ground
operations as defined in this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) A post-flight ground operation
includes each operation necessary to
return the reusable suborbital vehicle to
a safe condition after it lands or
impacts.
■ 16. Revise § 437.9 to read as follows:
§ 435.8
Human space flight.
To obtain a reentry license, an
applicant proposing to conduct a
reentry with a space flight participant,
crew, or government astronaut on board
the vehicle must demonstrate
compliance with §§ 460.5, 460.7,
460.11, 460.13, 460.15, 460.17, 460.51,
460.53, 460.59, 460.61, and 460.67 of
this subchapter.
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\19SER1.SGM
Scope of an experimental permit.
19SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 182 / Thursday, September 19, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
The FAA issues an experimental
permit authorizing an unlimited number
of launches or reentries for a reusable
suborbital vehicle design for the uses
described in § 437.5.
■ 17. Amend § 437.21 by revising
paragraphs (b)(1)(i) and (iv), (b)(3), (c),
and (d) to read as follows:
permit, an applicant must make each
reusable suborbital vehicle planned to
be flown available to the FAA for
inspection. The FAA will determine
whether each reusable suborbital
vehicle is built as represented in the
application.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 18. Amend § 437.23 by revising
paragraphs (a) and (b) to read as follows:
§ 437.21
§ 437.23
§ 437.9 Issuance of an experimental
permit.
General.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) General. The FAA is responsible
for complying with the procedures and
policies of the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) and other applicable
environmental laws, regulations, and
Executive Orders to consider and
document the potential environmental
effects associated with proposed
reusable suborbital vehicle launches or
reentries. An applicant must provide the
FAA with information needed to
comply with such requirements. The
FAA will consider and document the
potential environmental effects
associated with proposed reusable
suborbital vehicle launches or reentries.
*
*
*
*
*
(iv) Information requirements. An
application must include an approved
FAA Environmental Assessment,
Environmental Impact Statement,
categorical exclusion determination, or
written re-evaluation covering all
planned permitted activities in
compliance with NEPA and the Council
on Environmental Quality Regulations
for Implementing the Procedural
Provisions of NEPA.
*
*
*
*
*
(3) Human space flight. An applicant
proposing to conduct a permitted
operation with a space flight
participant, crew, or government
astronaut on board a reusable suborbital
vehicle must demonstrate compliance
with §§ 460.5, 460.7, 460.11, 460.13,
460.15, 460.17, 460.51, 460.53, 460.59,
460.61, and 460.67 of this subchapter.
(c) Use of a safety element approval.
If an applicant proposes to use any
reusable suborbital vehicle, safety
system, process, service, or personnel
for which the FAA has issued a safety
element approval under part 414 of this
chapter, the FAA will not reevaluate
that safety element to the extent its use
is within its approved scope. As part of
the application process, the FAA will
evaluate the integration of that safety
element into vehicle systems or
operations.
(d) Inspection before issuing a permit.
Before the FAA issues an experimental
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Sep 18, 2024
Jkt 262001
Program description.
(a) An applicant must provide—
(1) Dimensioned three-view drawings
or photographs of the reusable
suborbital vehicle; and
(2) Gross liftoff weight and thrust
profile of the reusable suborbital
vehicle.
(b) An applicant must describe—
(1) All reusable suborbital vehicle
systems, including any structural, flight
control, thermal, pneumatic, hydraulic,
propulsion, electrical, environmental
control, software and computing
systems, avionics, and guidance systems
used in the reusable suborbital vehicle;
(2) The types and quantities of all
propellants used in the reusable
suborbital vehicle;
(3) The types and quantities of any
hazardous materials used in the
reusable suborbital vehicle;
(4) The purpose for which a reusable
suborbital vehicle is to be flown; and
(5) Each payload or payload class
planned to be flown.
■ 19. Amend § 437.25 by revising
paragraph (c) to read as follows:
§ 437.25
*
*
*
*
*
(c) For each operating area, provide
the planned maximum altitude of the
reusable suborbital vehicle.
■ 20. Revise and republish § 437.31 to
read as follows:
§ 437.31 Verification of operating area
containment and key flight-safety event
limitations.
(a) An applicant must identify,
describe, and provide verification
evidence of the methods and systems
used to meet the requirement of
§ 437.57(a) to contain its reusable
suborbital vehicle’s instantaneous
impact point within an operating area
and outside any exclusion area. The
description must include, at a
minimum—
(1) Proof of physical limits on the
ability of the reusable suborbital vehicle
to leave the operating area; or
(2) Abort procedures and other safety
measures derived from a system safety
engineering process.
(b) An applicant must identify,
describe, and provide verification
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
evidence of the methods and systems
used to meet the requirements of
§ 437.59 to conduct any key flight-safety
event so that the reusable suborbital
vehicle’s instantaneous impact point,
including its expected dispersions, is
over unpopulated or sparsely populated
areas, and to conduct each reusable
suborbital vehicle flight so that the
reentry impact point does not loiter over
a populated area.
■ 21. Revise § 437.33 to read as follows:
§ 437.33
Landing and impact locations.
An applicant must demonstrate that
each location for nominal landing or
any contingency abort landing of the
reusable suborbital vehicle, and each
location for any nominal or contingency
impact or landing of a component of
that reusable suborbital vehicle, satisfies
§ 437.61.
■ 22. Amend § 437.53 by revising the
introductory text to read as follows:
§ 437.53 Pre-flight and post-flight
operations.
A permittee must protect the public
from adverse effects of hazardous
operations and systems in preparing a
reusable suborbital vehicle for flight at
a launch site in the United States and
returning the reusable suborbital vehicle
and any support equipment to a safe
condition after flight. At a minimum, a
permittee must—
*
*
*
*
*
■ 23. Amend § 437.57 by revising
paragraphs (a) and (c) to read as follows:
§ 437.57
Flight test plan.
76727
Operating area containment.
(a) During each permitted flight, a
permittee must contain its reusable
suborbital vehicle’s instantaneous
impact point within an operating area
determined in accordance with
paragraph (b) of this section and outside
any exclusion area defined by the FAA
in accordance with paragraph (c) of this
section.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) The FAA may prohibit a reusable
suborbital vehicle’s instantaneous
impact point from traversing certain
areas within an operating area by
designating one or more areas as
exclusion areas, if necessary to protect
public health and safety, safety of
property, or foreign policy or national
security interests of the United States.
An exclusion area may be confined to a
specific phase of flight.
■ 24. Amend § 437.59 by revising
paragraph (a) introductory text and (b)
to read as follows:
§ 437.59
Key flight-safety event limitations.
(a) A permittee must conduct any key
flight-safety event so that the reusable
E:\FR\FM\19SER1.SGM
19SER1
76728
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 182 / Thursday, September 19, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
suborbital vehicle’s instantaneous
impact point, including its expected
dispersion, is over an unpopulated or
sparsely populated area. At a minimum,
a key flight-safety event includes:
*
*
*
*
*
(b) A permittee must conduct each
reusable suborbital vehicle flight so that
the reentry impact point does not loiter
over a populated area.
■ 25. Amend § 437.61 by revising the
introductory text to read as follows:
reusable suborbital vehicle design
without invalidating the permit.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 28. Revise § 437.91 to read as follows:
§ 437.61
A permittee may launch or reenter
additional reusable suborbital vehicles
of the same design under the permit
after the FAA inspects each additional
reusable suborbital vehicle.
Landing and impact locations.
For a nominal or any contingency
abort landing of a reusable suborbital
vehicle, or for any nominal or
contingency impact or landing of a
component of that reusable suborbital
vehicle, a permittee must use a location
that—
*
*
*
*
*
■ 26. Revise and republish § 437.71 to
read as follows:
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
§ 437.71
Flight rules.
§ 437.85 Allowable design changes;
modification of an experimental permit.
(a) The FAA will identify in the
experimental permit the type of changes
that the permittee may make to the
15:57 Sep 18, 2024
For hire prohibition.
No permittee may carry any property
or human being for compensation or
hire on a reusable suborbital vehicle.
■ 29. Revise § 437.95 to read as follows:
§ 437.95 Inspection of additional reusable
suborbital vehicles.
PART 440—FINANCIAL
RESPONSIBILITY
30. The authority citation for part 440
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 51 U.S.C. 50901–50923.
31. Amend § 440.3 by revising the
definitions of ‘‘Maximum probable
loss’’, ‘‘Permit’’, ‘‘Permitted activity’’,
and ‘‘Third party’’ to read as follows:
■
(a) Before initiating flight, a permittee
must confirm that all systems and
operations necessary to ensure that
safety measures derived from §§ 437.55,
437.57, 437.59, 437.61, 437.63, 437.65,
437.67, and 437.69 are within
acceptable limits.
(b) During all phases of flight, a
permittee must—
(1) Follow flight rules that ensure
compliance with §§ 437.55, 437.57,
437.59, and 437.61; and
(2) Abort the flight if it would
endanger the public.
(c) A permittee may not operate a
reusable suborbital vehicle in a careless
or reckless manner that would endanger
any member of the public during any
phase of flight.
(d) A permittee may not operate a
reusable suborbital vehicle in areas
designated in a Notice to Airmen under
14 CFR 91.137, 91.138, 91.141, or
91.145, unless authorized by:
(1) Air Traffic Control; or
(2) A Flight Standards Certificate of
Waiver or Authorization.
(e) For any phase of flight where a
permittee operates a reusable suborbital
vehicle like an aircraft in the National
Airspace System, a permittee must
comply with the provisions of 14 CFR
part 91 specified in an experimental
permit issued under this part.
■ 27. Amend § 437.85 by revising
paragraph (a) to read as follows:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
§ 437.91
Jkt 262001
§ 440.3
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
Maximum probable loss (MPL) means
the greatest dollar amount of loss for
bodily injury or property damage that is
reasonably expected to result from a
licensed or permitted activity;
(1) Losses to third parties, excluding
Government personnel and other launch
or reentry participants’ employees
involved in licensed or permitted
activities and neighboring operations
personnel, that are reasonably expected
to result from a licensed or permitted
activity are those that have a probability
of occurrence of no less than one in ten
million.
(2) Losses to Government property
and Government personnel, excluding
government astronauts, involved in
licensed or permitted activities and
neighboring operations personnel that
are reasonably expected to result from
licensed or permitted activities are those
that have a probability of occurrence of
no less than one in one hundred
thousand.
*
*
*
*
*
Permit means an authorization the
FAA issues under this subchapter for
the launch or reentry of a reusable
suborbital vehicle.
Permitted activity means the launch
or reentry of a reusable suborbital
vehicle conducted under a permit
issued by the FAA.
*
*
*
*
*
Third party means—
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
(1) Any person other than:
(i) The United States, any of its
agencies, and its contractors and
subcontractors involved in launch or
reentry services for a licensed or
permitted activity;
(ii) A licensee, permittee, and its
contractors and subcontractors involved
in launch or reentry services for a
licensed or permitted activity;
(iii) A customer and its contractors
and subcontractors involved in launch
or reentry services for a licensed or
permitted activity;
(iv) A member of a crew;
(v) A space flight participant; and
(vi) A government astronaut.
(2) Government personnel, as defined
in this section and excluding
government astronauts, are third parties.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 32. Amend § 440.9 by revising and
republishing paragraph (b) to read as
follows:
§ 440.9 Insurance requirements for
licensed or permitted activities.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) A licensee or permittee must
obtain and maintain in effect a policy or
policies of liability insurance, in an
amount determined by the FAA under
paragraph (c) of this section, that
protects the following persons as
additional insureds to the extent of their
respective potential liabilities against
covered claims by a third party for
bodily injury or property damage
resulting from a licensed or permitted
activity:
(1) The licensee or permittee, its
customer, and their respective
contractors and subcontractors, and the
employees of each, involved in a
licensed or permitted activity;
(2) The United States, its agencies,
and its contractors and subcontractors
involved in a licensed or permitted
activity;
(3) Government personnel; and
(4) Space flight participants. This
paragraph (b)(4) shall cease to be
effective on September 30, 2025, unless
public law modifies the limitation in
section 50914 of Title 51 of the U.S.
Code.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 33. Amend § 440.17 by revising
paragraphs (c) introductory text, (d)
introductory text, (e) introductory text,
and (f) and adding paragraph (g) to read
as follows:
§ 440.17 Reciprocal waiver of claims
requirements.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) For each licensed or permitted
activity in which the United States, or
E:\FR\FM\19SER1.SGM
19SER1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 182 / Thursday, September 19, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
its contractors and subcontractors, is
involved or where property insurance is
required under § 440.9(d), the Federal
Aviation Administration of the
Department of Transportation, the
licensee or permittee, and each first-tier
customer must enter into a reciprocal
waiver of claims agreement. The
reciprocal waiver of claims must be in
a form acceptable to the Administrator,
such as those contained in advisory
circular AC 440.17–1, and must provide
that:
*
*
*
*
*
(d) For each licensed or permitted
activity in which the United States or its
contractors and subcontractors are
involved, the Federal Aviation
Administration of the Department of
Transportation and each space flight
participant must enter into or have in
place a reciprocal waiver of claims
agreement. The reciprocal waiver of
claims must be in a form acceptable to
the Administrator, such as those
contained in advisory circular AC
440.17–1.
*
*
*
*
*
(e) For each licensed or permitted
activity in which the United States or its
contractors and subcontractors is
involved, the Federal Aviation
Administration of the Department of
Transportation and each crew member
must enter into or have in place a
reciprocal waiver of claims agreement.
The reciprocal waiver of claims must in
a form acceptable to the Administrator,
such as those contained in advisory
circular AC 440.17–1.
*
*
*
*
*
(f) The licensee or permittee and each
space flight participant must enter into
a reciprocal waiver of claims agreement
under which each party waives and
releases claims against the other party to
the waiver, and agrees to assume
financial responsibility for property
damage it sustains and for bodily injury
or property damage, and to hold
harmless and indemnify each other from
bodily injury or property damage,
resulting from a licensed or permitted
activity, regardless of fault. This
paragraph (f) shall cease to be effective
as of September 30, 2025, unless public
law modifies the limitation in section
50914 of Title 51 of the U.S. Code.
(g) Any waiver, release, assumption of
responsibility or agreement to hold
harmless and indemnify pursuant to
this section does not apply to claims for
bodily injury or property damage
resulting from willful misconduct of any
of the parties to the reciprocal waiver of
claims, the contractors and
subcontractors of any of the parties to
the reciprocal waiver of claims, and in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Sep 18, 2024
Jkt 262001
the case of licensee or permittee and
customers and the contractors and
subcontractors of each of them, the
directors, officers, agents and employees
of any of the foregoing, and in the case
of the United States, its agents.
Appendix B Through E to Part 440—
[Removed]
34. Remove appendices B through E to
part 440.
■
PART 450—LAUNCH AND REENTRY
LICENSE REQUIREMENTS
35. The authority citation for part 450
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 51 U.S.C. 50901–50923.
36. Amend § 450.45 by revising
paragraphs (e)(3)(ii)(E) and (e)(5) to read
as follows:
■
§ 450.45
Safety review and approval.
*
*
*
*
*
(e) * * *
(3) * * *
(ii) * * *
(E) For an unguided suborbital launch
vehicle, the location of the vehicle’s
center of pressure in relation to its
center of gravity for the entire flight
profile.
*
*
*
*
*
(5) Human space flight. For a
proposed launch or reentry with a space
flight participant, crew, or government
astronaut on board a vehicle, an
applicant must demonstrate compliance
with §§ 460.5, 460.7, 460.11, 460.13,
460.15, 460.17, 460.51, 460.53, 460.59,
460.61, and 460.67 of this chapter.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 460—HUMAN SPACE FLIGHT
REQUIREMENTS
37. The authority citation for part 460
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 51 U.S.C. 50901–50923.
■
38. Add subpart C to read as follows:
Subpart C—Launch and Reentry with a
Government Astronaut with a Safety-Critical
Role
Sec.
460.55 Scope.
460.57 Applicability.
460.59 Training of government astronauts
with a safety-critical role.
460.61 Environmental control and life
support systems.
Subpart C—Launch and Reentry with a
Government Astronaut with a SafetyCritical Role
§ 460.55
Scope.
This subpart establishes requirements
for operators and applicants whose
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
76729
licensed or permitted operations involve
government astronauts on board a
vehicle.
§ 460.57
Applicability.
This subpart applies to:
(a) An applicant for a license or
permit under this chapter who proposes
to have a government astronaut with a
safety-critical role on board a vehicle.
(b) An operator licensed or permitted
under this chapter who has a
government astronaut with a safetycritical role on board a vehicle.
§ 460.59 Training of government
astronauts with a safety-critical role.
(a) An operator must ensure that each
government astronaut with a safetycritical role is trained on—
(1) How to carry out their safetycritical role on board or on the ground
so that the vehicle will not harm the
public; and
(2) Their role in nominal and nonnominal conditions, including abort
scenarios and emergency operations, to
the extent that performance of their role
could impact public safety.
(b) An operator must ensure any
government astronaut who has the
capability to control, in real time, a
launch or reentry vehicle’s flight path
during a phase of flight capable of
endangering the public:
(1) Receives vehicle and missionspecific training for each phase of flight
capable of endangering the public and
over which the government astronaut
has the capability to control the vehicle
by using one or more of the following:
(i) A method or device that simulates
the flight;
(ii) An aircraft whose characteristics
are similar to the vehicle or that has
similar phases of flight to the vehicle;
(iii) Flight testing; or
(iv) An equivalent method of training
approved by the FAA through the
license process.
(2) Trains for each mode of control or
propulsion, including any transition
between modes, such that the
government astronaut is able to control
the vehicle.
(3) Possesses aeronautical knowledge,
experience, and skills necessary to pilot
and control the launch or reentry
vehicle that will operate in the National
Airspace System (NAS). Aeronautical
experience may include hours in flight,
ratings, and training.
(c) With respect to training device
fidelity, an operator must:
(1) Ensure that any government
astronaut training device used to meet
the training requirements realistically
represents the vehicle’s configuration
and mission; or,
E:\FR\FM\19SER1.SGM
19SER1
76730
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 182 / Thursday, September 19, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
(2) Inform the government astronaut
being trained of the differences between
the training device and the vehicle’s
configuration and mission.
(d) An operator must update the
government astronaut training to ensure
that the training incorporates lessons
learned from training and operational
missions including—
(1) Providing traceability to revisions
or changes; and
(2) Documenting the completed
training for each government astronaut
and maintaining the documentation for
each active government astronaut.
(e) An operator must establish a
recurrent training schedule and ensure
that all training of government
astronauts performing safety-critical
roles is current before launch or reentry.
(f) For licensed missions supporting
U.S. Government contracts, operators
may meet the training requirements of
this section through U.S. Government’s
contractual requirements.
§ 460.61 Environmental control and life
support systems.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
(a) An operator must provide
atmospheric conditions adequate to
sustain life and consciousness for all
inhabited areas within a vehicle that
house a government astronaut. The
operator must monitor and control the
following atmospheric conditions in the
inhabited areas or demonstrate through
the license or permit process that an
alternate means provides an equivalent
level of safety—
(1) Composition of the atmosphere,
which includes oxygen and carbon
dioxide, and any revitalization;
(2) Pressure, temperature and
humidity;
(3) Contaminants that include
particulates and any harmful or
hazardous concentrations of gases, or
vapors; and
(4) Ventilation and circulation.
(b) An operator must provide an
adequate redundant or secondary
oxygen supply for any government
astronaut with a safety-critical role.
(c) An operator must provide a
redundant means of preventing cabin
depressurization; or prevent
incapacitation of any government
astronaut with a safety-critical role in
the event of loss of cabin pressure.
■ 39. Add subpart D to read as follows:
Subpart D—Launch and Reentry with a
Government Astronaut Without a SafetyCritical Role
Sec.
460.63 Scope.
460.65 Applicability.
460.67 Training of government astronauts
without a safety-critical role.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 Sep 18, 2024
Jkt 262001
Subpart D—Launch and Reentry with a
Government Astronaut Without a
Safety-Critical Role
§ 460.63
Scope.
This subpart establishes requirements
for operators and applicants whose
licensed or permitted operations involve
government astronauts on board a
vehicle without a safety-critical role.
§ 460.65
Applicability.
This subpart applies to:
(a) An applicant for a license or
permit under this chapter who proposes
to have a government astronaut without
a safety-critical role on board a vehicle.
(b) An operator licensed or permitted
under this chapter who has a
government astronaut without a safetycritical role on board a vehicle.
§ 460.67 Training of government
astronauts without a safety-critical role.
An operator must ensure that each
government astronaut without a safetycritical role is trained on how to
respond to emergency situations,
including smoke, fire, loss of cabin
pressure, and emergency exit.
Issued under authority provided by 49
U.S.C. 106(f) and 51 U.S.C. 509 in
Washington, DC.
Michael Gordon Whitaker,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2024–20900 Filed 9–18–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY
CORPORATION
29 CFR Part 4044
Allocation of Assets in SingleEmployer Plans; Interest Assumptions
for Valuing Benefits
Pension Benefit Guaranty
Corporation (PBGC).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This final rule amends the
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation’s
regulation on Allocation of Assets in
Single-Employer Plans to prescribe the
spreads component of the interest
assumption under the asset allocation
regulation for plans with valuation dates
of October 31, 2024–January 30, 2025.
These interest assumptions are used for
valuing benefits under terminating
single-employer plans and for other
purposes.
SUMMARY:
DATES:
Effective October 31, 2024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Monica O’Donnell (odonnell.monica@
pbgc.gov), Attorney, Office of the
General Counsel, Pension Benefit
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Guaranty Corporation, 445 12th Street
SW, Washington, DC 20024–2101, 202–
229–8706. If you are deaf or hard of
hearing or have a speech disability,
please dial 7–1–1 to access
telecommunications relay services.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: PBGC’s
regulation on Allocation of Assets in
Single-Employer Plans (29 CFR part
4044) prescribes actuarial
assumptions—including an interest
assumption—for valuing benefits under
terminating single-employer plans
covered by title IV of the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974
(ERISA). The interest assumption is also
posted on PBGC’s website
(www.pbgc.gov).
PBGC uses the interest assumption in
§ 4044.54 to determine the present value
of annuities in an involuntary or
distress termination of a singleemployer plan under the asset
allocation regulation. The assumptions
in part 4044 of PBGC’s regulations are
also used in other situations where it is
appropriate for liabilities to align with
private sector group annuity prices. For
example, PBGC’s regulations on Notice,
Collection, and Redetermination of
Withdrawal Liability (29 CFR part 4219)
and Duties of Plan Sponsor Following
Mass Withdrawal (29 CFR part 4281)
provide that these assumptions are used
to value liabilities for purposes of
determining withdrawn employers’
reallocation liability in the event of a
mass withdrawal from a multiemployer
plan. Multiemployer plans that receive
special financial assistance under the
regulation on Special Financial
Assistance by PBGC (29 CFR part 4262)
must, as a condition of receiving special
financial assistance, use the interest
assumption to determine withdrawal
liability for a prescribed period.
Additionally, plan sponsors are required
to use some, or all of these assumptions
for specified purposes (e.g., reporting
benefit liabilities in filings required
under PBGC’s regulation on Annual
Financial and Actuarial Information
Reporting (29 CFR part 4010) or
determining certain amounts to transfer
to PBGC’s Missing Participants Program
on behalf of a missing participant of a
terminating defined benefit plan under
PBGC’s regulation on Missing
Participants (29 CFR part 4050)) and
may use them for other purposes (e.g.,
to ensure that plan spinoffs comply with
section 414(l) of the Internal Revenue
Code (the Code)).
On June 6, 2024, PBGC issued a final
rule at 89 FR 48291 that changes the
structure of the interest assumption for
valuation dates on or after July 31, 2024,
from the select and ultimate approach to
E:\FR\FM\19SER1.SGM
19SER1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 182 (Thursday, September 19, 2024)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 76714-76730]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-20900]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Parts 401, 413, 415, 431, 435, 437, 440, 450, and 460
[Docket No. FAA-2023-1656; Amdt. Nos. 401-10, 413-13, 415-8, 431-8,
435-6, 437-4, 440-7, 450-3, 460-4]
RIN 2120-AL19
U.S. Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act Incorporation
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule incorporates various changes required by the
United States Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act of 2015. This
final rule provides regulatory clarity to applicants seeking licenses
for space flight operations involving government astronauts by adding
two new subparts to the human space flight regulations containing
requirements for operators with government astronauts with and without
safety-critical roles on board vehicles.
DATES: Effective November 18, 2024.
The compliance date for this final rule is November 18, 2024.
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: Charles Huet, Space Policy Division,
Space Regulations and Standards Branch, ASZ-210, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591;
telephone (202) 306-9069; email [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
List of Abbreviations and Acronyms Frequently Used in This Document
Expendable Launch Vehicle (ELV)
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO)
Maximum Probable Loss (MPL)
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
Reusable Launch Vehicle (RLV)
United States Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act (CSLCA)
United States Government (USG)
Table of Contents
I. Authority for This Rulemaking
II. Executive Summary
A. Purpose of the Regulatory Action
B. Changes From the Proposed Rule
C. Summary of the Costs and Benefits
III. Background
A. Summary of the NPRM
B. General Overview of Comments
C. Differences Between the NPRM and the Final Rule
IV. Discussion of Comments and the Final Rule
V. Regulatory Notices and Analyses
A. Regulatory Impact Analysis
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
C. International Trade Impact Assessment
D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment
E. Paperwork Reduction Act
F. Environmental Analysis
VI. Executive Order Determinations
A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
B. Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
C. Executive Order 13211, Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
D. Executive Order 13609, Promoting International Regulatory
Cooperation
VII. Additional Information
A. Electronic Access and Filing
B. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
List of Subjects
I. Authority for This Rulemaking
The Commercial Space Launch Act of 1984, as amended and codified at
51 U.S.C. 50901-50923 (the Act), authorizes the Secretary of
Transportation to oversee, license, and regulate commercial launch and
reentry activities, and the operation of launch and reentry sites
within the United States (U.S.) or as carried out by U.S. citizens.
Section 50905 directs the Secretary to exercise this responsibility
consistent with public health and safety, safety of property, and the
national security and foreign policy interests of the United States. In
addition, section 50903 requires the Secretary to encourage,
facilitate, and promote commercial space launches and reentries by the
private sector. As codified in 49 CFR 1.83(b), the Secretary has
delegated authority to the FAA Administrator to carry out these
functions.
II. Executive Summary
A. Purpose of the Regulatory Action
This rule makes several changes to incorporate government
astronauts in the regulations, in accordance with the United States
Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act (CSLCA).\1\ It amends title
14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) parts 401, 413, 415,
431, 435, 437, 440, 450, and 460 by incorporating statutory changes
resulting from the CSLCA. Specifically, it adds definitions for
``Government astronaut,'' ``International partner astronaut,'' and
``International Space Station Intergovernmental Agreement,'' and
revises definitions of ``Human space flight incident,'' ``Launch,''
``Launch accident,'' ``Reenter; reentry'' ``Reentry accident,'' and
``Space flight participant,'' to incorporate changes required by adding
the definition of ``Government astronaut.'' The rule also creates two
new subparts in 14 CFR part 460 that include requirements for operators
and applicants whose licensed or permitted operations involve
government astronauts with and without safety-critical roles on board a
vehicle. The rule revises the human space flight sections of parts 415,
431, 435, 437, and 450 to add government astronauts to the list of
people who can be on board a launch or reentry vehicle, and adds
certain additional provisions in part 460 to the list of provisions
with which an operator must comply.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The CSLCA adds government astronauts as a third category of
people on board launch or reentry vehicles, excludes government
astronauts from the definition of third party, adds space flight
participants to the waiver of claims with operators, and expands the
applicability of permits to more types of vehicles and operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, this rule expands the applicability of part 437 to
include launching or reentering certain reusable suborbital vehicles.
The rule also revises parts 401, 413, 415, 431, 435, 437, 440,
[[Page 76715]]
450, and 460 to make conforming amendments to expand the eligibility
for an experimental permit from reusable suborbital rockets to reusable
suborbital vehicles.
The rule revises part 440 in accordance with the statute and makes
conforming amendments. Specifically, it updates the financial
responsibility requirements in part 440 to exclude government
astronauts from the definitions of ``Third party'' and ``Maximum
probable loss (MPL)''. It also adds space flight participants to the
insurance requirements in Sec. 440.9 and the reciprocal waiver of
claims requirements in Sec. 440.17. Finally, this rule removes the
templates for waiver of claims and assumption of responsibilities in
appendices B through E of part 440 from the regulations and places them
in a separate advisory circular (AC).
B. Changes From the Proposed Rule
The final rule makes several changes from the proposed rule. It
replaces the proposed term ``human being,'' proposed in the notice,
with ``crew, space flight participant, or government astronaut'' in the
human space flight requirements of 14 CFR 415.8, 431.8, 435.8, and
437.21(b)(3). In 14 CFR 440.3, the final rule does not adopt the
proposed change to government personnel; and excludes government
astronaut from the definitions of MPL and third party. The final rule
amends the proposed language regarding the reciprocal waiver of claims
templates to specify that the templates contained in advisory circular
AC 440.17-1 satisfy the reciprocal waiver of claims requirements in 14
CFR 440.17. The final rule replaces the proposed requirement in 14 CFR
460.59(d)(1) to track and update government astronaut training in
writing with the requirement to provide traceability to revisions or
changes to government astronaut training. Finally, the final rule
changes the proposed requirement for operators to train government
astronauts in 14 CFR 460.59 and 460.67 to a requirement that operators
ensure government astronauts are trained.
C. Summary of the Costs and Benefits
These changes have a minimal impact on licensed commercial space
activity with government astronauts because the changes align
regulations with the current statutory requirements and practices for
crew, space flight participants, and government astronauts. The FAA has
been applying the statutory changes since they went into effect in
2015. Since this rule codifies these current practices, there is
effectively no change from the baseline practice without the rule, and
therefore no measurable resulting benefits or costs.
III. Background
A. Summary of the NPRM
On August 18, 2023, the FAA published the notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) titled ``U.S. Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness
Act Incorporation'' (88 FR 56546). The FAA also posted draft guidance
material for the proposal in the form of a draft ``AC 440.17-1
Reciprocal Waiver of Claims Requirements'' for comment in the NPRM
docket. This NPRM proposed to amend 14 CFR parts 401, 413, 415, 431,
435, 437, 440, 450, and 460 by incorporating statutory changes
resulting from the CSLCA. The NPRM proposed to add definitions for
``Government astronaut,'' ``International partner astronaut,'' and
``International Space Station Intergovernmental Agreement'' and revise
other definitions required to address the addition of ``Government
astronaut.'' The NPRM also proposed expanding applicability of
permitted operations for suborbital rockets to suborbital launch and
reentry vehicles; revising the human space flight sections of parts
415, 431, 435, 437, and 450 to include the term ``human being'' to
incorporate government astronauts; updating the financial
responsibility requirements to exclude government astronauts from the
definitions of ``Third party'' and ``Government personnel'' in part
440; adding space flight participants to the insurance requirements in
Sec. 440.9, and the reciprocal waiver of claims requirements in Sec.
440.17; and removing the templates for waiver of claims and assumption
of responsibilities in appendices B through E of part 440 from the
regulations and placing them in a separate advisory circular (AC).
Finally, the NPRM proposed creating two new subparts in 14 CFR part 460
to include requirements for operators and applicants who's licensed or
permitted operations involve government astronauts with and without
safety-critical roles on board a vehicle.
B. General Overview of Comments
The FAA received 15 comments from individuals, industry
associations, and launch and reentry operators. All of the commenters
generally supported the proposed changes; however, some suggested
changes to the proposal, as discussed more fully in Section IV.
The FAA received comments on the following general areas of the
proposal:
1. Removing government astronauts from the definition of third party
2. Duplication of requirements
3. Informed consent of government astronauts
4. Government astronauts without a safety-critical role
5. Moving waiver of claims templates to an advisory circular
6. Government astronauts on permitted operations
7. Tracking government astronaut training requirements
8. Environmental controls
9. Use of the term ``human being''
10. Aeronautical knowledge requirement
11. Permit eligibility
12. Government astronauts on foreign vehicles
13. Clarification on the role of international partner astronauts
14. Training of space flight participants for safety critical roles
15. Use of American National Standards Institute (ANSI) standard for
human spaceflight ontology
16. Transparency of MPL Methodology
17. Commercial Use of Asteroid or Space Resources
C. Differences Between the NPRM and the Final Rule
The final rule does not adopt the proposed change to the definition
of ``government personnel'' in 14 CFR 440.3; and excludes government
astronauts from the definitions of third party and maximum probable
loss in the same section. The final rule replaces the proposed term
``human being'' with ``crew, space flight participant, or government
astronaut'' in 14 CFR 415.8, 431.8, 435.8, and 437.21(b)(3). The FAA
also amends the government astronaut training requirements in the final
rule to make clear that an operator must ensure government astronauts
are appropriately trained but is not required to conduct that training
itself. Finally, the final rule allows electronic means of tracking
government astronaut training.
IV. Discussion of Comments and the Final Rule
The FAA makes changes to this final rule in response to comments
made by the public. Summaries of the comments and the FAA's responses
are grouped by category in the following subsections.
A. Treatment of Government Astronauts Under Part 440
In accordance with the CSLCA,\2\ this rule excludes government
astronauts from the definition of third party. It also revises the
definition of maximum
[[Page 76716]]
probable loss (MPL) such that government astronauts are not included in
MPL calculations. It makes no change to the definition of government
personnel.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 51 U.S.C. 50902 and 50914.
\3\ The NPRM proposed changing the definition of ``government
personnel'' but the final rule is not adopting that change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title 51 U.S.C. chapter 509 requires a licensee to obtain insurance
or demonstrate financial responsibility in amounts to compensate for
the maximum probable loss from claims by third parties and the United
States Government (USG) for certain specified claims. 51 U.S.C.
50914(a)(1). By excluding government astronauts from the definition of
third party, government astronauts must also necessarily be excluded
from the MPL calculation in Sec. 50914(a)(1)(A). The NPRM proposed to
exclude government astronauts from the definition of ``third party''
and consequently the definition of ``government personnel'' because
government personnel are third parties under 14 CFR 440.3. Under the
proposal, the presence of government astronauts during licensed or
permitted activities would not affect the amount of insurance coverage
operators are required to obtain under 14 CFR 440.9. Additionally, by
excluding government astronauts from the definition of ``government
personnel'' in Sec. 440.3, government astronauts would have also
necessarily been excluded as additional insureds under Sec. 440.9(b).
Multiple commenters indicated that it is not clear in the NPRM who
is responsible for losses to government astronauts during licensed
activities. Sierra Space commented that it believes section 112(j) of
the CSLCA amended the definition of ``third party'' in 51 U.S.C.
50902(26) to exclude government astronauts. Sierra Space found that
this is a logical exclusion, as government astronauts are intentionally
incorporated and integrated into launch missions and should not be
treated as third parties for liability purposes.
Virgin Galactic commented that the removal of government astronauts
from the definition of government personnel removes the requirement for
licensees to obtain an insurance policy to protect government
astronauts from their potential liability in their involvement in
launch or reentry services. Virgin Galactic also commented that the
exclusion of government astronauts from the definition of third party
will prevent the FAA from including potential government astronaut
claims in MPL calculations. Virgin Galactic requested that the FAA
address the implications the exclusion of government astronauts from
the definition of third party will have on MPL determinations and
indemnification eligibility under 51 U.S.C. 50915. Virgin Galactic
noted that it understands the proposed rule as preventing licensees
from being eligible for government indemnification when carrying
government astronauts as government astronauts are neither third
parties nor government personnel.
In the final rule, the FAA explicitly excludes government
astronauts from the definition of ``third party'' in Sec. 440.3 by
adding the phrase ``excluding government astronauts'' and adding text
that excludes government astronauts from government personnel as it is
used in the definition of ``third party.'' Excluding government
astronauts from being considered a third party effectively means that
government astronauts are not included in MPL calculations and are
therefore prevented from bringing claims as third parties. The presence
of government astronauts on board a launch or reentry vehicle would
therefore not increase MPL values. Because government astronauts are
not third parties, they cannot recover for bodily injury or property
damage they may suffer during licensed activities using the licensee's
or permittee's insurance required under Sec. 440.9. However, the USG
could be responsible for losses to government astronauts who are USG
employees because the USG agrees to be responsible for personal injury
to, death of, or property damage or loss sustained by its own employees
through the waiver of claims.
Excluding government astronauts from the definition of third
parties does not affect the government indemnification provisions in 51
U.S.C. 50915. Section 50915 states that the USG, subject to
appropriation or additional legislative authority, shall provide for
the payment of certain successful claims by a third party as a result
of licensed activity to the extent the total amount of successful
claims related to one launch or reentry exceeds the insurance or
demonstration of financial responsibility values and is less than the
maximum amount set in Sec. 50915(a)(1)(B). Virgin Galactic stated that
it understands the proposal would prevent licensees from being eligible
for government indemnification when carrying government astronauts as
the government astronauts are neither third parties nor government
personnel under the proposed rule.
The characterization of government astronauts as not being third
parties under the CSLCA and part 440 does not affect whether a licensee
receives government indemnification under Sec. 50915. Rather, the
total number of successful claims, along with the necessary
appropriations or legislation, are determining factors in whether a
licensee receives government indemnification. A licensed activity with
only government astronauts on board would not render that activity
ineligible for government indemnification of a successful claim of a
third party.
In the final rule, the FAA does not amend the definition of
government personnel in 14 CFR 440.3. By rulemaking finalized in 1998,
the FAA added the term ``government personnel'' to part 440 and added
government personnel to the list of additional insureds. Financial
Responsibility Requirements for Licensed Launch Activities, Final Rule,
63 FR 45592 (Aug. 26, 1998). As it explained in the preamble to the
final rule, the FAA made these changes in response to a Senate Report
stating that Congress intended for government personnel directly
associated with the commercial launch operations to be classified as
third parties. S. Rep. No. 100-593 (1988). The FAA additionally stated
in the Financial Responsibility Requirements for Licensed Launch
Activities NPRM, published in 1996, that treating government personnel
as third parties and naming them as additional insureds is in accord
with the definition of third party contained in the statute. Financial
Responsibility Requirements for Licensed Launch Activities, NPRM, 61 FR
38992 (July 25, 1996). This is because employees of the USG are
different than the USG as an entity. Because of this distinction,
treating USG employees as third parties did not conflict with the
statute.
In 2015, Congress explicitly excluded government astronauts from
the definition of third parties. There is no legislative history to
suggest that Congress also wanted the FAA to exclude government
astronauts who are USG personnel from being protected as additional
insureds. In fact, under the CSLCA, Congress made changes to the
additional insureds requirement in 51 U.S.C. 50914(a)(4) by adding
space flight participants as additional insureds but did not make any
changes to explicitly exclude government astronauts. Therefore,
government astronauts who are USG personnel should also be treated as
additional insureds. The FAA need not make any changes to Sec.
440.9(b) to include government astronauts because any government
astronauts who are employees of the USG are necessarily
[[Page 76717]]
included as additional insureds by being government personnel.
B. Duplication of Requirements
This rule finalizes the proposal to create two new subparts in part
460 to address the training of government astronauts with safety-
critical and non-safety-critical roles during licensed activity. The
FAA revises the language in the proposal regarding training government
astronauts to clarify that while an operator is responsible for
ensuring that a government astronaut is appropriately trained, the
operator itself is not required to conduct the training.
SpaceX commented that the FAA's proposed changes to part 460 would
duplicate training requirements with no material increase to public
safety and would place additional regulatory burden on operators.
SpaceX argued that NASA's training requirements are sufficient and
should automatically be accepted by the FAA. SpaceX also noted that it
believes the NPRM could potentially conflict with NASA's or other
government agencies' training requirements in the future. SpaceX stated
that the FAA already recognizes the appropriateness of certain NASA
training requirements by referring to them in the NPRM. SpaceX also
noted that all or nearly all of the part 460 regulations could be met
by current Crew Dragon training approved by NASA as part of the
Commercial Crew Program. While SpaceX agreed with the FAA's statements
in the NPRM that the FAA has broader regulatory authority to protect
public safety, SpaceX does not believe the FAA has articulated why a
streamlined acceptance of NASA training requirements is insufficient to
protect public safety. To support its position, SpaceX stated that the
part 450 payload review and determination requirements explicitly
remove any duplication of government oversight in Sec. 450.43(b) in
which the FAA defers payload review to agencies with principal
regulatory responsibility. SpaceX noted that the FAA should adopt the
same approach as it relates to government astronaut training
requirements in part 460. SpaceX recommended that the FAA revise the
final rule to codify that its training requirements are ``not intended
to duplicate, conflict with, or replace NASA's training requirements
for government astronauts'' by following the Sec. 450.43(b) model.
SpaceX suggested a single update in Sec. 460.59 applicable only to
government astronauts that states ``An operator must certify that each
government astronaut is trained in accordance with requirements
established or approved by the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration for government astronauts.'' SpaceX stated that these
revisions will provide flexibility for any future updates to training
processes with NASA or the incorporation of NASA-approved training
regimens with other government agencies, both domestically and
internationally.
Under 51 U.S.C. chapter 509, the FAA has the authority and
responsibility to protect public safety during launches and reentries.
NASA does not share this public safety oversight authority. Because
government astronauts may have the ability to affect public safety, the
FAA must establish regulations to mitigate any public safety risk.
Furthermore, the FAA notes that NASA does not currently provide all
government astronaut training for a commercially operated mission. An
operator would provide vehicle- and mission-specific training because
it is the most familiar with the specific vehicle and operation. The
FAA chose to use part 460 crew training requirements to evaluate past
licenses involving government astronauts because crew similarly have
the capability to affect public safety. An operator can meet part 460
requirements by leveraging the contractual obligations between NASA and
the operator. NASA contractual obligations require the operator to
comply with requirements NASA uses to certify operations to the
International Space Station contained in the Crew Transportation
Technical Management Process CCT-PLN-1120 Section 6.3.1, Crew
Transportation and Services Requirements Document CCT-REQ-1130 Section
3.8.5.1, and Crew Transportation Operations Standards CCT-STD-1150
Section 5. NASA certifies that government astronauts received the
training required by contract, and the FAA uses that certification as
verification that the operator meets the FAA regulations. NASA provides
certification and the FAA evaluates the contractual requirements during
the licensing process. The FAA notes that there will be no change to
how licenses involving government astronauts are evaluated and issued
as a result of this rule.
The payload review requirements in 14 CFR 450.43(b) specify that
the FAA will not make a payload determination for those aspects of
payloads that are subject to regulation by the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) or the Department of Commerce. The FAA will review all
payloads to determine their effect on safety of launch but will not
make a determination on those aspects of payloads that are subject to
regulation by the FCC or the Department of Commerce. Streamlined Launch
and Reentry License Requirements, Final Rule, 85 FR 79566, 79589 (Dec.
10, 2020). Similarly, in this rule, the FAA finalizes requirements that
allow the FAA to satisfy its responsibility to evaluate licenses for
operations including government astronauts for the purposes of a
government astronaut's potential to affect public safety.
While the FAA maintains its authority to issue regulations relating
to the training of government astronauts to protect public safety, it
acknowledges that the operator may not always be the entity conducting
the training. For example, some training may be provided by NASA or by
a contractor. Therefore, in this final rule the FAA changes the text in
Sec. Sec. 460.59 and 460.67 training sections for government
astronauts from ``an operator must train each government astronaut'' to
``an operator must ensure that each government astronaut is trained''.
Instead of requiring operators to train each government astronaut, the
FAA rule specifies that an operator must ensure that training has been
provided to each government astronaut. This change clarifies that
operators do not necessarily need to be the entity providing the
training; however, the requirement is still levied on the operator to
ensure that government astronauts have been trained in accordance with
the regulatory requirements.
C. Informed Consent of Government Astronauts
This final rule does not require government astronauts to sign
informed consent forms with operators. Two commenters disagreed with
this approach.
Virgin Galactic commented that not all potential government
astronauts may be in the NASA Astronaut Corps or have the level of
training to understand the inherent risks associated with spaceflight
activities. Virgin Galactic also commented that there are several state
statutes that protect licensees from liability when informed consent is
provided.
Blue Origin commented that the requirements in Sec. 460.45 are
intended to illuminate the specific risks and hazards associated with
the commercial safety record of each launch vehicle, as well as the
general risks of spaceflight. Blue Origin noted that it remains prudent
to provide government astronauts with the same information and
opportunities for dialogue available to space flight participants. Blue
Origin also recommended that government astronauts without safety-
critical roles
[[Page 76718]]
be informed of the risks associated with spaceflight, similar to the
informed consent space flight participants must provide. Blue Origin
suggested that the FAA adopt language similar to Sec. 460.45 in its
proposed subpart D to apply the same requirement to government
astronauts without a safety-critical role.
The FAA is not adding a requirement that government astronauts
provide informed consent to the final rule because, as it stated in the
NPRM, government astronauts are aware of the risks of space flight. As
explained in the NPRM, the NASA Administrator designates government
astronauts, and that designation implies appropriate knowledge and
training for the performance of official duties. In addition, there is
no statutory requirement for government astronauts to sign informed
consent forms and doing so may interfere with their rights under the
Federal Employees' Compensation Act. Therefore, the U.S. government
should inform government astronauts of any risks they may be exposed to
while performing official duties. This applies to all government
astronauts, including those with a safety-critical role.
In response to Virgin Galactic's concern that state statutes
protect licensees from liability when informed consent is provided, in
most, if not all, of these states the respective statutes provide
specific informed consent language that serves as a waiver of claims
between the operator and the participant. The consideration of informed
consent as a waiver of claims is further reason why a government
astronaut should not sign an informed consent agreement with the
operator because government astronauts do not waive claims.
In response to Blue Origin's comment that government astronauts
should receive the same mission information and opportunity to discuss
that information with the operator, the FAA notes that the fact that
there is not a regulatory requirement for government astronauts to sign
an informed consent form does not preclude operators from providing
information to and speaking with government astronauts. An operator may
inform a government astronaut about the unique risks and safety record
of the vehicle, but the FAA will not require a government astronaut's
signature on an informed consent agreement.
D. Moving Waiver of Claims Templates to an AC
This rule finalizes the proposal to move the templates for waiver
of claims in appendix B through E of part 440 to a separate advisory
circular and adds language to clarify that these templates are approved
by the FAA and may be used to meet the requirements in Sec. 440.17.
SpaceX disagreed with moving the templates to a separate advisory
circular. Specifically, SpaceX noted that the inclusion of cross-
waivers in the part 440 appendices has streamlined negotiations related
to cross-waivers between licensees or permittees and customers and has
therefore also lessened FAA's burden to review cross-waiver submissions
to ensure compliance with the regulations. SpaceX stated that although
the current language of Sec. 440.17 allows for submission of a ``form
that otherwise provides all the same obligations and benefits'' as the
cross-waivers contained in the part 440 appendices, as a practical
matter, licensees simply submit the cross-waiver forms contained in the
appendices. SpaceX emphasized that moving the sample forms out of an
appendix into a separate advisory circular will be confusing to less
frequent signers of cross-waivers and will encourage more negotiation
between the licensee or permittee and the individuals or entities
required to sign cross-waivers. SpaceX noted that any such negotiation
that results in changes to the cross-waiver language will then add to
the FAA's burden by requiring the FAA to spend additional time
reviewing the submission to ensure compliance with Sec. 440.17.
Sierra Space commented that the language proposed in Sec. 440.17
could potentially be read to imply that the Administrator must approve
the form used for the waivers in each case. Sierra Space recommended
rewording the language in Sec. 440.17 to clarify that review or
approval by the Administrator is not required if a licensee adopts the
language already set forth in a template published by the FAA.
An individual commented that they support the FAA's proposal to
move the cross-waiver templates to an advisory circular because the
templates are merely examples of how to meet a regulation and are not
themselves regulatory.
This rule moves the waiver of claims templates from the part 440
appendices to an advisory circular because these templates are not
regulatory, but simply examples, and moving them to an advisory
circular provides greater flexibility to update or revise as needed.
These templates are provided to assist operators with meeting the
reciprocal waiver of claims requirements but are not the only means by
which an operator may meet those requirements. They are, therefore,
more appropriately located in an advisory circular. SpaceX and Sierra
Space commented that the language in the NPRM's proposed Sec. 440.17
was not clear that the waiver of claims forms in the advisory circular
would be acceptable and approved by the FAA without the need for
additional legal review, unless modified. Therefore, the FAA is
revising the language in Sec. 440.17 to state: ``The reciprocal waiver
of claims must be in a form acceptable to the Administrator, such as
those contained in advisory circular AC 440.17-1.'' This change will
clarify that the reciprocal waiver of claims templates found in AC
4401.17-1, or any future updates, are acceptable to the FAA and may be
used to meet the requirements in Sec. 440.17.
E. Government Astronauts on Permitted Operations
The final rule would not prohibit government astronauts from being
onboard during permitted operations.\4\ Some commenters questioned
whether government astronauts would ever be part of a permitted
operation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Permitted operations are operations conducted in accordance
with 14 CFR part 437 Experimental Permits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ascendant Spaceflight Services (Ascendant) commented that the FAA
should delete references to ``government astronaut'' in permitted
operations because suborbital vehicles in the development or
experimental phase would not be carrying government astronauts. Rather,
those vehicles would only be carrying crew. Ascendant asserted that
experimental permit human space flight requirements in Sec. 437.5 only
apply to crew.
The FAA does not agree. While Sec. 437.5 does identify launch or
reentry for the purpose of crew training as eligible for an
experimental permit, Sec. 437.5(b) states that eligibility for a
permit also includes a showing of compliance with requirements for
obtaining a license. An operator may choose to conduct an operation
with government astronauts on board under an experimental permit to
demonstrate compliance with a requirement to obtain a license. Although
no government astronauts have flown on a permitted vehicle to date, it
is possible they might in the future to train for a licensed mission.
F. Tracking Astronaut Training Requirements
The final rule revises proposed Sec. 460.59(d)(1) to require
operators ensure government astronaut training is up to date by
incorporating lessons
[[Page 76719]]
learned from training and operational missions by providing
traceability to revisions or changes. The proposed rule would have
required operators to track each revision of the training plan and
update training in writing.
The FAA received two comments on this issue. ALPA supported the
FAA's proposals requiring operators to track and update the training of
government astronauts. SpaceX, however, recommended providing more
flexibility for tracking changes to training. SpaceX explained that it
utilizes a sophisticated change control system to track updates to
training and suggested revising proposed Sec. 460.59(d)(1) to require
an operator to update the government astronaut training continually to
ensure the training incorporates lessons learned from training and
operational missions by providing traceability to revisions or changes.
The FAA agrees with SpaceX's suggested change. Proposed Sec.
460.59(d)(1) would require all revisions to training to be tracked in
written form. The FAA finds that SpaceX's recommended change would
provide FAA with sufficient compliance insight through traceability,
which meets the intent of the FAA's initial proposed Sec.
460.59(d)(1), while also permitting operators to use modern electronic
systems. The FAA adopts SpaceX's proposed language in the final rule.
G. Environmental Controls
This rule finalizes the proposal to require operators to establish
environmental controls for operations involving government astronauts
with a safety-critical role because, as with crew, the FAA found that
government astronauts would likewise need to be protected from
atmospheric conditions and receive training that is necessary for the
safety of the public on the ground, in air, and in space.
The FAA received two comments on this issue. An individual
questioned whether environmental controls referred to life support
systems or environmental impacts. Environmental controls in these
regulations do refer to life support systems. SpaceX commented that
humidity is not a safety-critical metric of determining suitable
atmospheric conditions for human beings and that compared to other
conditions listed within the subparts to Sec. 460.61, humidity is an
outlier given that it is not a direct risk to life and consciousness.
The FAA retains humidity in Sec. 460.61(a)(2) in the final rule.
The FAA notes that while very high humidity environments could
influence core body temperature, the time high humidity would take to
cause an impact would be much longer than impacts from pressure and
temperature changes in the inhabited area of a vehicle. However, if a
flight crew depended on visual information through a window, humidity
control would be necessary to avoid windows fogging and condensation
that can hinder a pilot's vision and could therefore impact public
safety.
H. Use of the Term ``Human Beings''
In this rule, the FAA replaces the proposed term ``human beings''
with the defined terms ``space flight participant,'' ``crew,'' and
``government astronaut'' where appropriate. In the NPRM, the FAA
proposed to use the term ``human being'' to encompass all three
categories of persons who can currently be carried on board a vehicle:
government astronaut, space flight participant, and crew.
The FAA received two comments on this issue. Sierra Space commented
that the NPRM's use of the term ``human beings'' could potentially lead
individuals, lawmakers, courts, and licensees to incorrectly assume
that there is some other category of humans who may be present on board
licensed operations besides those that have already been defined (space
flight participants, crew, and government astronauts). Sierra Space
stated that the FAA should remove the use of ``human beings'' and
instead revert to listing each category of individuals to which the
language applies. An individual similarly commented that the
classification of non-astronaut workers as ``human beings'' is an
unnecessary classification that would only overcomplicate future
requirements on these workers.
The FAA finds that using the term ``human beings'' could cause
unnecessary confusion among stakeholders and therefore is removing that
term in the final rule. Instead, the FAA is replacing ``human beings''
with the defined terms ``space flight participant,'' ``crew,'' and
``government astronaut'' where appropriate.
I. Aeronautical Knowledge Requirement
This rule finalizes proposed Sec. 460.59(b)(3), which requires an
operator to ensure any government astronaut with a safety-critical role
possesses aeronautical knowledge, experience, and skills necessary to
pilot and control the launch or reentry vehicle that will operate in
the National Airspace System (NAS). The regulation specifies that
aeronautical experience may include hours in flight, ratings, and
training.
SpaceX commented that proposed Sec. 460.59(b)(3) would transfer an
existing requirement onto operators to ensure government astronauts are
trained, and that NASA should continue to hold this responsibility and
set forth any requirements it deems suitable for designated astronauts
as set forth in 51 U.S.C. 50902(4). To support its position, SpaceX
noted that the training requirement is tailored to winged vehicles
rather than fully automated capsules, such as its Crew Dragon, which
are not maneuverable during launch and reentry, and which utilize
Notices to Air Missions and Notices to Mariners to remove the need for
in-flight and real-time coordination within airspace. SpaceX therefore
found that the aeronautical knowledge, including hours in aircraft
flight, required by proposed Sec. 460.59(b)(3) is irrelevant to safe
vehicle operation and recommended that FAA remove this requirement as
overly prescriptive and inapplicable.
The FAA disagrees that proposed Sec. 460.59(b)(3) should be
removed from the final rule. The requirement for aeronautical knowledge
only applies to government astronauts who have the capability to
control, in real time, a launch or reentry vehicle's flight path during
a phase of flight capable of endangering the public. The requirement is
not a blanket requirement for all government astronauts. Autonomous
vehicles where government astronauts do not have any input for phases
of flight going through the NAS would not need to comply with this
requirement as such aeronautical knowledge, experience, and skills
would not be necessary. Any NASA requirement for aeronautical knowledge
for government astronauts that pilot a vehicle is not redundant because
it can be used to demonstrate compliance with the FAA requirement.
J. Permit Eligibility
This rule finalizes the proposal to replace the term ``reusable
suborbital rocket'' with ``reusable suborbital vehicle'' in Sec.
437.5. It also finalizes the proposal to remove the term ``new'' from
Sec. 437.5(a) to allow research and development of existing design
concepts, equipment, or operating techniques, consistent with the
CSLCA.
Ascendant commented that experimental permits should not be limited
to suborbital launch vehicles. Ascendant stated that there is no
difference in risk to the public between any experimental launch or
reentry vehicle, suborbital or orbital, which
[[Page 76720]]
does not carry commercial payloads and paid occupants. Ascendant noted
that the limited applicability of experimental permits places
additional burden on developers of orbital or expendable suborbital
vehicles which require licenses before test flight can begin. Ascendant
also asked for clarification regarding whether the training referenced
in Sec. 437.5 refers to training crew in flight to operate a licensed
vehicle, or training crew to operate a vehicle for which a license
would be issued (for example, to complete integrated testing with
humans).
The training referenced in Sec. 437.5 refers to training crew in
flight to operate a licensed vehicle. The FAA's statutory authority to
issue experimental permits only applies to suborbital vehicles, and
therefore the FAA does not have the authority to expand the
applicability of experimental permits to any orbital vehicles. Title 51
U.S.C. 50906 states that the Secretary may issue a permit only for
reusable suborbital rockets or reusable launch vehicles that will be
launched into a suborbital trajectory or reentered under that permit
solely for research and development to test design concepts, equipment,
or operating techniques; showing compliance with requirements as part
of the process for obtaining a license under this chapter; or crew
training for a launch or reentry using the design of the rocket or
vehicle for which the permit would be issued. The FAA is only expanding
eligibility to launch or reentry vehicles on a suborbital trajectory to
align with the CSLCA. Therefore, the FAA will not expand the
applicability of experimental permits to any orbital vehicles.
K. Government Astronauts on Foreign Vehicles
This rule defines ``government astronaut'' to match the statutory
definition and provides regulatory clarity to applicants seeking FAA
licenses for space flight operations involving government astronauts.
An individual commented that it may be beneficial to acknowledge
U.S. government astronauts flying on board international partner
spacecraft and international launch providers. The individual noted
that the International Space Station (ISS) currently uses Soyuz
vehicles from Russia and that there could be advances in vehicles from
ESA and JAXA, for example.
The FAA does not license foreign launch or reentry vehicles that
are launching or reentering outside the U.S., and therefore addressing
government astronauts flying on board foreign spacecraft that launch or
reenter outside the U.S. is outside the scope of the FAA's regulatory
authority and this rulemaking.
L. Clarification on the Role of International Partner Astronauts
This rule defines an ``International partner astronaut'' as an
individual designated under Article 11 of the International Space
Station Intergovernmental Agreement, by a partner to that agreement
other than the U.S., as qualified to serve as an ISS crew member. This
definition was taken directly from the CSLCA.
Sierra Space encouraged the FAA to further clarify the role of
international partner astronauts, including clarifying who would not
qualify as an international partner astronaut. Sierra Space stated that
since the NPRM's definition of ``international partner astronaut''
applies only to astronauts contributed by ISS partner states who are
crewmembers on board the ISS, the term would not apply to international
astronauts from non-partner states, nor would it apply to any
international astronaut serving missions unrelated to the ISS. Sierra
Space concluded that all such individuals would be considered space
flight participants under the proposed regulations and would therefore
be subject to the waiver and informed consent requirements applicable
to space flight participants.
Sierra Space noted that there may be cases in which foreign
governments may be unwilling to allow or require their employees to
enter the waivers of claims required of space flight participants, or
to personally assume the risk of human space flight operations as
required by the informed consent regime. Sierra Space stated that the
FAA should consider granting latitude to operators carrying astronauts
from foreign countries by waiving informed consent and individual
waiver requirements, especially if those countries have sufficiently
mature astronaut training programs and are willing to accept financial
responsibility for claims brought by their employees.
The FAA is adopting the statutory definition of international
partner astronaut. The FAA realizes that the statutory definition only
applies to ISS partner astronauts. Any foreign astronaut who does not
meet the definition of international partner astronaut would be
considered a space flight participant under FAA regulations and would
have to comply with space flight participant regulations. An operator
may request a waiver to the waiver of claims requirement for space
flight participants for those instances in which a foreign astronaut is
characterized as a space flight participant rather than an
international partner astronaut.
M. Training of Space Flight Participants for Safety Critical Roles
SpaceX commented that, in the interest of public safety and the
safety of those on board launch and reentry vehicles, the FAA should
update the final rule to reflect in its regulations that space flight
participants should be trained appropriately to conduct potentially
lifesaving functions during an emergency to protect both themselves and
the public, including operating a vehicle during launch or reentry in a
manner to protect public safety. SpaceX noted that the definitions for
crew, government astronaut, and space flight participant within 51
U.S.C. 50902 were developed at a time when Congress anticipated all
crewed vehicles to be operated either by crew or by government
astronauts. However, SpaceX noted that while the statute provides
training for crew and government astronauts, missions that have only
had space flight participants on board have occurred for both orbital
and suborbital systems. Furthermore, SpaceX stated that the statutory
definition of space flight participants, defined in 51 U.S.C. 50902 to
be any person that is not crew or a government astronaut, does not
prohibit the FAA from requiring an operator to train space flight
participants to operate a vehicle during launch or reentry. SpaceX
concluded that, therefore, the FAA should revise its regulations to
allow an operator to train space flight participants to operate a
vehicle during launch or reentry because the underlying statute does
not prohibit space flight participant training.
Sierra Space similarly commented that the FAA should adopt common
requirements for training which apply to any passenger or remote
operator in a safety critical role, regardless of how that individual
is classified under the regulations. Sierra Space stated these common
requirements should clarify what constitutes a ``safety-critical role''
to limit the definition to those individuals who are essential to
ensuring that the vehicle operates in real time to ensure public
safety.
In the NPRM, the FAA did not propose to add training requirements
for space flight participants. The FAA explained that whereas the
definition of crew in title 51 expressly acknowledges a crew member's
ability to perform activities directly relating to operation of the
vehicle, the definition of space flight participant contains no express
authority to do so. Furthermore, current
[[Page 76721]]
crew qualification and training requirements include a demonstration of
the ability to withstand the stresses of space in sufficient condition
to safely carry out duties so the vehicle will not harm the public.
Each crew member with a safety-critical role is also required to
possess and carry an FAA second-class medical certificate. Similarly,
government astronauts who perform a safety-critical role must be
trained to carry out that role because it may affect the safety of the
public. An operator may choose to train space flight participants to
conduct potentially lifesaving functions during an emergency to protect
themselves, however, the regulations do not require this training
because it is not necessary to protect public safety.
The FAA has already addressed training requirements for those
missions that only have space flight participants onboard. Under Sec.
460.51, an operator must train each space flight participant before
flight on how to respond to emergency situations, including smoke,
fire, loss of cabin pressure, and emergency exits. An operator may also
provide mission-specific training to space flight participants for
missions without crew or government astronauts. The FAA therefore finds
that the training required by Sec. 460.51 is sufficient to satisfy
missions with only space flight participants on board.
N. Use of ANSI Standard for Human Spaceflight Ontology
This rule updates definitions relating to commercial space launch
and reentry vehicles and occupants to reflect current legislative
definitions.
Both the Space Infrastructure Foundation (SIF) and an individual
commented that the FAA should use terms identified in AIAA/ANSI S-153
2021 Human Spaceflight: Spacecraft Architecture and Systems Engineering
Ontology Standard (S-153) in its applicable commercial space
regulations.
SIF stated that because the National Technology Transfer
Advancement Act (NTTAA) compels government organizations to adopt
industry standards developed under a voluntary consensus process, and
failure to do so must be justified to Congress on a case-by-case basis,
the FAA should use the standards identified in S-153. An individual
stated that S-153 is critical for U.S. commercial spaceflight because
it establishes the baseline of the ontology, streamlines
interdisciplinary communication, and enables strategic planning, and
the FAA should consider S-153's integration into the current
rulemaking.
The FAA does not adopt S-153 into its regulations because the
updated definitions are required by Congress to reflect current
legislative definitions in 51 U.S. Code 50902. Furthermore, the
terminology in S-153 does not align with the purpose of this rulemaking
because the terminology in S-153 focuses on human spaceflight
spacecraft from an architectural and system engineering perspective,
rather than on the statutorily required definitions the FAA must
incorporate into its regulations.
O. Transparency of MPL Methodology
An individual commented that publishing the MPL methodology would
provide greater transparency and reduce uncertainty for commercial
space businesses, insurance companies, and investors. The commenter
noted that this transparency would pose no risks to national security
and that publishing the MPL methodology in an AC would not require
notice and comment for modification. The commenter recommended amending
Sec. 440.7(a) or (b) to include that the method for determining MPL is
set forth in an AC.
The scope of this rulemaking is to codify current statutory
requirements mandated by the CSLCA. The FAA finds that providing MPL
methodology in an AC is beyond the scope of the rulemaking because it
is not a change required by the CSLCA, and this final rule does not
pertain to MPL methodology.
P. Commercial Use of Asteroid or Space Resources
Space Law & Policy Solutions noted that the CSLCA contains a
provision in title IV which authorizes U.S. citizens to perform non-
governmental space activities aimed at the recovery, possession,
ownership, use, and sale of asteroid or space resources. Space Law &
Policy Solutions noted that the NPRM does not mention title IV nor its
enactment in 51 U.S.C. 51303 and asked the FAA a series of related
questions. Such questions included (i) why space resources are not
mentioned in the NPRM; (ii) whether the FAA deems title IV of the CSLCA
as providing the FAA with congressional authority to license space
resource activities and if so, whether an amendment is required to its
regulations; (iii) whether the FAA deems itself the proper Article VI
authorizing agency to review and license a space resource activity; and
(iv) whether the FAA believes it requires additional authority from
Congress to include on orbit authority to oversee space resource
activities. Space Law & Policy Solutions noted that it understands its
questions are beyond the scope of the FAA's request in the NPRM, but
that the FAA should address the lack of clarity on the licensing and
implementation of space resources.
The FAA does not have statutory authority to regulate space
resources, and the commenter's questions are out of scope for the
current rulemaking.
V. Regulatory Notices and Analyses
Federal agencies consider impacts of regulatory actions under a
variety of Executive orders and other requirements. First, Executive
Order 12866, Executive Order 13563, and Executive Order 14094
(``Modernizing Regulatory Review''), direct that each Federal agency
shall propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination
that the benefits of the intended regulation justify the 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. 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 that may
result in the expenditure by State, local, and Tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more
(adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year. The current
threshold after adjustment for inflation is $183 million using the most
current (2023) Implicit Price Deflator for the Gross Domestic Product.
In conducting these analyses, the FAA has determined that this
rule: will result in benefits that justify costs; is not a
``significant regulatory action'' as defined in section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866, as amended; will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities; will not create
unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States; and
will not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or Tribal
governments, or on the private sector.
A. Regulatory Impact Analysis
This rule amends 14 CFR parts 401, 413, 415, 431, 435, 437, 440,
450, and 460 by incorporating statutory changes resulting from the
CSLCA. This rule adds a definition for ``government astronaut'' and
updates other definitions to account for that addition. This rule also
updates financial responsibility
[[Page 76722]]
requirements in part 440 to exclude government astronauts from the
definitions of ``third party'' and adds space flight participants to
the insurance requirements in Sec. 440.9. Templates for reciprocal
waiver of claims agreements are moved from part 440 appendices B
through E to an AC. This rule also adds two new subparts to part 460 to
address operator requirements for government astronauts playing safety-
critical and non-safety-critical roles during launches and reentries.
In addition, the FAA replaces the terms ``crew'' and ``space flight
participant'' with ``crew, space flight participant, or government
astronaut'' in Sec. Sec. 415.8, 431.8, and 435.8 for applicants
seeking a license for operations involving human space flight and that
must demonstrate compliance with human space flight requirements. This
change accommodates the creation of the government astronaut category
in part 460.
This rule affects all U.S. commercial space operators and launches
and reentries licensed under 14 CFR parts 401, 413, 415, 431, 435, 437,
440, 450, and 460 that will carry a government astronaut on board.
Table 1 details the changes in each part.
There are no changes in the final rule from the proposed rule that
notably change the analysis presented for the proposed rule.
Table 1--Changes by Section
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section Change Effect of change
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 401.5 Definitions........ Add definitions None. The FAA has
for ``Government been applying
Astronaut,'' these definitions
``International in accordance
partner with the statute
astronaut,'' and since the CSLCA
``International went into effect.
Space Station This change
Intergovernmental provides
Agreement.'' regulatory
Revising clarity.
definitions for
``Human space
flight
incident,''
``Launch,''
``Launch
accident,''
``Reenter,''
``Reentry
accident,'' and
``Space flight
participant''.
Sec. 401.7 Definitions........ Add definitions None. The FAA has
for ``Government been applying
Astronaut,'' these definitions
``International in accordance
partner with the statute
astronaut,'' and since the CSLCA
``International went into effect.
Space Station This change
Intergovernmental provides
Agreement.'' regulatory
Revising clarity.
definition for
``Space flight
participant''.
Sec. 413.3(f)................. Replace the term None. The FAA has
``rocket'' with been applying
the term these definitions
``vehicle'' to in accordance
align with the with the statute
increase in scope since the CSLCA
from Sec. 437.3. went into effect.
This change
provides
regulatory
clarity.
Sec. 415.8 Human Space Flight Replace ``flight None. The FAA has
in Part 415, LAUNCH LICENSE. crew or a space been applying
flight these
participant'' requirements to
with ``a space government
flight astronauts in
participant, accordance with
crew, or the statute since
government the CSLCA went
astronaut.'' Add into effect. This
sections 460.59, change provides
460.61, and regulatory
460.67 to the clarity.
list of sections
with which an
applicant
proposing to
conduct a launch
with a space
flight
participant,
crew, or
government
astronaut on
board must
demonstrate
compliance.
Sec. 431.8 Human Space Flight Replace ``flight None. The FAA has
in Part 431, LAUNCH AND REENTRY crew or a space been applying
OF A REUSABLE LAUNCH VEHICLE flight these
(RLV). participant'' requirements to
with ``a space government
flight astronauts in
participant, accordance with
crew, or the statute since
government the CSLCA went
astronaut.'' Add into effect. This
sections 460.59, change provides
460.61, and regulatory
460.67 to the clarity.
list of sections
with which an
applicant
proposing to
conduct a launch
with a space
flight
participant,
crew, or
government
astronaut on
board must
demonstrate
compliance.
Sec. 435.8 Human Space Flight Replace ``flight None. The FAA has
in Part 435, REENTRY OF A crew or a space been applying
REENTRY VEHICLE OTHER THAN A flight these
REUSABLE LAUNCH VEHICLE (RLV). participant'' requirements to
with ``a space government
flight astronauts in
participant, accordance with
crew, or the statute since
government the CSLCA went
astronaut.'' Add into effect. This
sections 460.59, change provides
460.61, and regulatory
460.67 to the clarity.
list of sections
with which an
applicant
proposing to
conduct a launch
with a space
flight
participant,
crew, or
government
astronaut on
board must
demonstrate
compliance.
Sec. 437.3 Definitions in Part Replaced None. The FAA has
437, EXPERIMENTAL PERMITS. suborbital rocket been applying
with suborbital these definitions
vehicle in the in accordance
definitions for with the statute
``envelope since the CSLCA
expansion'', went into effect.
``exclusion This change
area'', and provides
``reentry impact regulatory
point''. Updated clarity.
the definition of
``permitted
vehicle'' to
include reusable
launch vehicles
that are launched
on a suborbital
trajectory or are
reentered.
Updated the
definition of
``permitted
vehicle'' to add
that it includes
``a reusable
launch vehicle
that will be
launched into a
suborbital
trajectory or
reentered from a
suborbital
trajectory''.
Sec. Sec. 437.5, 437.7, Replace None. The FAA has
437.9, 437.21, 437.23, 437.25, ``suborbital been applying
437.31, 437.33, 437.53, 437.57, rocket'' with these definitions
437.59, 437.61, 437.71, ``reusable in accordance
437.85., 437.91, and 437.95. suborbital with the statute
vehicle''. since the CSLCA
went into effect.
This change
provides
regulatory
clarity.
Sec. 437.5(a)................. Remove ``new'' to None. The FAA has
allow research been applying
and development these definitions
of existing in accordance
design concepts, with the statute
equipment, or since the CSLCA
operating went into effect.
techniques. This change
provides
regulatory
clarity.
Sec. 437.21(b)(3)............. Replace ``flight None. The FAA has
crew or a space been applying
flight these
participant'' requirements to
with ``a space government
flight astronauts in
participant, accordance with
crew, or the statute since
government the CSLCA went
astronaut.'' Add into effect. This
sections 460.59, change provides
460.61, and regulatory
460.67 to the clarity.
list of sections
with which an
applicant
proposing to
conduct a launch
with a space
flight
participant,
crew, or
government
astronaut on
board must
demonstrate
compliance.
Move appendices B-E in part 440, .................. None.
FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY, to an
AC..
[[Page 76723]]
Sec. 440.3.................... Revise definition None. Updates to
of permit and the definition of
permitted permit and
activity. Exclude permitted
government activity align
astronaut from statue with
losses to current practice.
government Excluding
personnel in the government
definition of astronaut from
``MPL''''. third party means
Exclude that they are not
government included in MPL
astronaut from calculations and
the definition of are prevented
``Third party''. from making
claims as third
parties in
alignment with
current practice.
Government
astronauts that
are employed by
the US government
would be covered
by insurance
required under
Sec. 440.9(b)
because they are
government
personnel.
Sec. 440.9(b)................. Add space flight None. The FAA has
participants to been requiring
the list in which the addition of
a licensee or space flight
permittee must participants to
obtain and the insurance
maintain in requirements with
effect a policy operators in
or policies of accordance with
liability the statute since
insurance to the CSLCA went
protect their into effect. This
respective change provides
potential regulatory
liabilities clarity.
against covered
claims by a third
party for bodily
injury or
property damage
resulting from a
licensed or
permitted
activity.
Sec. 440.17(c), (d), and (e).. Add language to None. The FAA has
require the been requiring
licensee or reciprocal waiver
permittee to of claims in
enter into a accordance with
reciprocal waiver existing
of claims regulations. This
agreement, in a change provides
form acceptable regulatory
to the flexibility by
Administrator moving the
such as those templates from
contained in regulatory
advisory circular language to an
AC 440.17-1, with advisory
each space flight circular.
participant.
Sec. 440.17(f) and (g)........ Add requirement None. The FAA has
for reciprocal been requiring
waiver of claims reciprocal waiver
between operators of claims between
and space flight operators and
participants as space flight
section (f). Move participants in
current section accordance with
(f) to section the statute since
(g). the CSLCA went
into effect. This
change provides
regulatory
clarity. Current
section (f) is
moved to section
(g) without
changes to
accommodate the
addition of
section (f).
Sec. 450.45(e)(3)(ii)(E) Human Replace None. The FAA has
Space Flight in part 450. ``rocket's'' with been applying
``vehicle's''. these definitions
in accordance
with the statute
since the CSLCA
went into effect.
This change
provides
regulatory
clarity.
Sec. 450.45(e)(5)............. Replace ``flight None. The FAA has
crew or a space been applying
flight these
participant'' requirements in
with ``a space accordance with
flight the statute since
participant, the CSLCA went
crew, or into effect. This
government change provides
astronaut.'' Add regulatory
sections 460.59, clarity.
460.61, and
460.67 to the
list of sections
with which an
applicant
proposing to
conduct a launch
with a space
flight
participant,
crew, or
government
astronaut on
board must
demonstrate
compliance.
Add Subpart C, Launch and Add requirements None. Operators
Reentry with a Government applicable to have been
Astronaut With a Safety- government training
Critical Role, after Subpart B astronauts with a government
in Sec. 460 Scope, HUMAN safety-critical astronauts in
SPACE FLIGHT REQUIREMENTS. role. order to satisfy
NASA contractual
requirements.
This change makes
some of that
training required
by regulation.
Add Subpart D, Launch and Add requirements None. Operators
Reentry with a Government applicable to have been
Astronaut Without a Safety- government training
Critical Role after Subpart C astronauts government
in Sec. 460 Scope, HUMAN without a safety- astronauts in
SPACE FLIGHT REQUIREMENTS. critical role. order to satisfy
NASA contractual
requirements.
This change makes
some of that
training required
by regulation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
These changes will have a minimal impact on licensed commercial
space activity with government astronauts because the changes align
regulations with the current statutory requirements for crew, for space
flight participants, and with current practices. The FAA has been
applying the statutory changes since they went into effect in 2015.
Since this rule codifies these current practices, there is effectively
no change from the baseline without the rule and, therefore, no
measurable resulting benefits or costs.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) of 1980, (5 U.S.C. 601-612),
as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996 (Pub. L. 104-121) and the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010 (Pub. L.
111-240), requires Federal agencies to consider the effects of the
regulatory action on small business and other small entities and to
minimize any significant economic impact. The term ``small entities''
comprises small businesses and not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields,
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
This rule updates definitions relating to commercial space launch
and reentry vehicles and occupants to reflect current statutory
definitions and requirements, as well as implements clarifications to
financial responsibility requirements in accordance with the CSLCA. The
FAA has been applying the statutory changes since they went into effect
in 2015. Since this rule codifies these current practices, the FAA
certifies that this rule 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
[[Page 76724]]
the potential effects of this rule and determined that it will not
create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United
States.
D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
governs the issuance of Federal regulations that require unfunded
mandates. An unfunded mandate is a regulation that requires a State,
local, or Tribal government or the private sector to incur direct costs
without the Federal Government having first provided the funds to pay
those costs. The FAA determined that this final rule will not result in
the expenditure of $183 million or more by State, local, or Tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector, in any one year.
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.
F. 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 (NEPA) in the absence of extraordinary circumstances. The FAA has
determined this rulemaking action qualifies for the categorical
exclusion identified in paragraph 5-6.6f for regulations and involves
no extraordinary circumstances.
VI. Executive Order Determinations
A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
The FAA has analyzed this final rule under the principles and
criteria of Executive Order (E.O.) 13132, Federalism. The FAA 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 13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Consistent with Executive Order 13175, Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,\5\ and FAA Order 1210.20,
American Indian and Alaska Native Tribal Consultation Policy and
Procedures,\6\ the FAA ensures that Federally Recognized Tribes
(Tribes) are given the opportunity to provide meaningful and timely
input regarding proposed Federal actions that have the potential to
have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian Tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian Tribes; or to affect uniquely or significantly
their respective Tribes. At this point, the FAA has not identified any
unique or significant effects, environmental or otherwise, on Tribes
resulting from this final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 65 FR 67249 (Nov. 6, 2000).
\6\ FAA Order No. 1210.20 (Jan. 28, 2004), available at
www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/1210.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Executive Order 13211, Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
The FAA analyzed this final rule under E.O. 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). The FAA has determined that it is
not a ``significant energy action'' under the Executive order and is
not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy.
D. Executive Order 13609, Promoting International Regulatory
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.
VII. Additional Information
A. Electronic Access and Filing
A copy of the NPRM, all comments received, this final rule, and all
background material may be viewed online at www.regulations.gov using
the docket number listed above. A copy of this final rule will be
placed in the docket. Electronic retrieval help and guidelines are
available on the website. It is available 24 hours each day, 365 days
each year. An electronic copy of this document may also be downloaded
from the Office of the Federal Register's website at
www.federalregister.gov and the Government Publishing Office's website
at www.govinfo.gov. A copy may also be found at the FAA's Regulations
and Policies website at www.faa.gov/regulations_policies.
Copies may also be obtained by sending a request to the Federal
Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence
Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591, or by calling (202) 267-9677.
Commenters must identify the docket or notice number of this
rulemaking.
All documents the FAA considered in developing this final rule,
including economic analyses and technical reports, may be accessed in
the electronic docket for this rulemaking.
B. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of
1996 requires the 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
www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/sbre_act/.
List of Subjects
14 CFR Part 401
Organization and functions (Government agencies), Space
transportation and exploration.
14 CFR Part 413
Confidential business information, Space transportation and
exploration.
14 CFR Part 415
Aviation safety, Environmental protection, Investigations,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Space transportation and
exploration.
14 CFR Part 431
Launch and reentry safety, Aviation safety, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Rockets, Space transportation and
exploration.
14 CFR Part 435
Launch and reentry safety, Aviation safety, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Rockets, Space transportation and
exploration.
[[Page 76725]]
14 CFR Part 437
Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Space transportation and exploration.
14 CFR Part 440
Indemnity payments, Insurance, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Space transportation and exploration.
14 CFR Part 450
Aircraft, Aviation safety, Environmental protection,
Investigations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Space
transportation and exploration.
14 CFR Part 460
Aircraft, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Space
transportation and exploration.
The Amendments
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends chapter III of title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations as follows:
PART 401--ORGANIZATION AND DEFINITIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 401 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 51 U.S.C. 50901-50923.
0
2. Amend Sec. 401.5 by:
0
a. Adding definitions in alphabetical order for ``Government
astronaut'', ``International partner astronaut'', and ``International
Space Station Intergovernmental Agreement''; and
0
b. Revising the definitions for ``Human space flight incident'',
``Launch'', ``Launch accident'', ``Reenter; reentry'', ``Reentry
accident'', and ``Space Flight participant''.
The additions and revisions read as follows:
Sec. 401.5 Definitions.
* * * * *
Government astronaut means an individual who--
(1) Is designated by the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration under Title 51, United States Code, Section 20113(n);
(2) Is carried within a launch vehicle or reentry vehicle in the
course of their employment, which may include performance of activities
directly relating to the launch, reentry, or other operation of the
launch vehicle or reentry vehicle; and
(3) Is either--
(i) An employee of the United States Government, including the
uniformed services, engaged in the performance of a Federal function
under authority of law or an Executive act; or
(ii) An international partner astronaut.
* * * * *
Human space flight incident means an unplanned event that poses a
high risk of causing a serious or fatal injury to a space flight
participant, crew, or government astronaut.
* * * * *
International partner astronaut means an individual designated
under Article 11 of the International Space Station Intergovernmental
Agreement, by a partner to that agreement other than the United States,
as qualified to serve as an International Space Station crew member.
International Space Station Intergovernmental Agreement means the
Agreement Concerning Cooperation on the International Space Station,
signed in Washington, DC, on January 29, 1998 (TIAS 12927).
* * * * *
Launch means to place or try to place a launch vehicle or reentry
vehicle and any payload, space flight participant, crew, or government
astronaut from Earth in a suborbital trajectory, in Earth orbit in
outer space, or otherwise in outer space, and includes preparing a
launch vehicle for flight at a launch site in the United States. Launch
includes the flight of a launch vehicle and includes pre- and post-
flight ground operations as follows:
(1) Beginning of launch. (i) Under a license, launch begins with
the arrival of a launch vehicle or payload at a U.S. launch site.
(ii) Under a permit, launch begins when any pre-flight ground
operation at a U.S. launch site meets all of the following criteria:
(A) Is closely proximate in time to flight,
(B) Entails critical steps preparatory to initiating flight,
(C) Is unique to space launch, and
(D) Is inherently so hazardous as to warrant the FAA's regulatory
oversight.
(2) End of launch. (i) For launch of an orbital expendable launch
vehicle (ELV), launch ends after the licensee's last exercise of
control over its launch vehicle.
(ii) For launch of an orbital reusable launch vehicle (RLV) with a
payload, launch ends after deployment of the payload. For any other
orbital RLV, launch ends upon completion of the first sustained,
steady-state orbit of an RLV at its intended location.
(iii) For a suborbital ELV or RLV launch, launch ends after
reaching apogee if the flight includes a reentry, or otherwise after
vehicle landing or impact on Earth, and after activities necessary to
return the vehicle to a safe condition on the ground.
Launch accident means--
(1) An event that causes a fatality or serious injury (as defined
in 49 CFR 830.2) to any person who is not associated with the flight;
(2) An event that causes damage estimated to exceed $25,000 to
property not associated with the flight that is not located at the
launch site or designated recovery area;
(3) An unplanned event occurring during the flight of a launch
vehicle resulting in the impact of a launch vehicle, its payload, or
any component thereof:
(i) For an expendable launch vehicle, outside designated impact
limit lines; and
(ii) For a reusable launch vehicle, outside a designated landing
site.
(4) For a launch that takes place with a person on board, a
fatality or serious injury to a space flight participant, crew, or
government astronaut.
* * * * *
Reenter; reentry means to return or attempt to return,
purposefully, a reentry vehicle and its payload, space flight
participant, crew, or government astronaut, if any, from Earth orbit or
from outer space to Earth. The term ``reenter; reentry'' includes
activities conducted in Earth orbit or outer space to determine reentry
readiness and that are critical to ensuring public health and safety
and the safety of property during reentry flight. The term ``reenter;
reentry'' also includes activities conducted on the ground after
vehicle landing on Earth to ensure the reentry vehicle does not pose a
threat to public health and safety or the safety of property.
Reentry accident means--
(1) Any unplanned event occurring during the reentry of a reentry
vehicle resulting in the impact of the reentry vehicle, its payload, or
any component thereof, outside a designated reentry site;
(2) An event that causes a fatality or serious injury (as defined
in 49 CFR 830.2) to any person who is not associated with the reentry;
(3) An event that causes damage estimated to exceed $25,000 to
property not associated with the reentry and not located within a
designated reentry site; and
(4) For a reentry that takes place with a person on board, a
fatality or serious injury to a space flight participant, crew, or
government astronaut.
* * * * *
Space flight participant means an individual, who is not crew or a
[[Page 76726]]
government astronaut, carried on board a launch vehicle or reentry
vehicle.
* * * * *
0
3. Amend Sec. 401.7 by:
0
a. Adding definitions in alphabetical order for ``Government
astronaut'', ``International partner astronaut'', and ``International
Space Station Intergovernmental Agreement''; and
0
b. Revising the definition for ``Space flight participant''.
The additions and revision read as follows:
Sec. 401.7 Definitions.
* * * * *
Government astronaut means an individual who--
(1) Is designated by the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration under Title 51, United States Code, Section 20113(n);
(2) Is carried within a launch vehicle or reentry vehicle in the
course of their employment, which may include performance of activities
directly relating to the launch, reentry, or other operation of the
launch vehicle or reentry vehicle; and
(3) Is either--
(i) An employee of the United States Government, including the
uniformed services, engaged in the performance of a Federal function
under authority of law or an Executive act; or
(ii) An international partner astronaut.
* * * * *
International partner astronaut means an individual designated
under Article 11 of the International Space Station Intergovernmental
Agreement, by a partner to that agreement other than the United States,
as qualified to serve as an International Space Station crew member.
International Space Station Intergovernmental Agreement means the
Agreement Concerning Cooperation on the International Space Station,
signed in Washington, DC, on January 29, 1998 (TIAS 12927).
* * * * *
Space flight participant means an individual, who is not crew or a
government astronaut, carried on board a launch vehicle or reentry
vehicle.
* * * * *
PART 413--LICENSE APPLICATION PROCEDURES
0
4. The authority citation for part 413 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 51 U.S.C. 50901-50923.
0
5. Amend Sec. 413.3 by revising paragraph (f) to read as follows:
Sec. 413.3 Who must obtain a license or permit.
* * * * *
(f) A person, individual, or foreign entity otherwise requiring a
license under this section may instead obtain an experimental permit to
launch or reenter a reusable suborbital vehicle under part 437 of this
chapter.
PART 415--LAUNCH LICENSE
0
6. The authority citation for part 415 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 51 U.S.C. 50901-50923.
0
7. Revise Sec. 415.8 to read as follows:
Sec. 415.8 Human space flight.
To obtain a launch license, an applicant proposing to conduct a
launch with a space flight participant, crew, or government astronaut
on board must demonstrate compliance with Sec. Sec. 460.5, 460.7,
460.11, 460.13, 460.15, 460.17, 460.51, 460.53, 460.59, 460.61, and
460.67 of this subchapter.
PART 431--LAUNCH AND REENTRY OF A REUSABLE LAUNCH VEHICLE (RLV)
0
8. The authority citation for part 431 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 51 U.S.C. 50901-50923.
0
9. Revise Sec. 431.8 to read as follows:
Sec. 431.8 Human space flight.
To obtain a license, an applicant proposing to conduct a reusable
launch vehicle mission with a space flight participant, crew, or
government astronaut on board must demonstrate compliance with
Sec. Sec. 460.5, 460.7, 460.11, 460.13, 460.15, 460.17, 460.51,
460.53, 460.59, 460.61, and 460.67 of this subchapter.
PART 435--REENTRY OF A REENTRY VEHICLE OTHER THAN A REUSABLE LAUNCH
VEHICLE (RLV)
0
10. The authority citation for part 435 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 51 U.S.C. 50901-50923.
0
11. Revise Sec. 435.8 to read as follows:
Sec. 435.8 Human space flight.
To obtain a reentry license, an applicant proposing to conduct a
reentry with a space flight participant, crew, or government astronaut
on board the vehicle must demonstrate compliance with Sec. Sec. 460.5,
460.7, 460.11, 460.13, 460.15, 460.17, 460.51, 460.53, 460.59, 460.61,
and 460.67 of this subchapter.
PART 437--EXPERIMENTAL PERMITS
0
12. The authority citation for part 437 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 51 U.S.C. 50901-50923.
0
13. Revise Sec. 437.3 to read as follows:
Sec. 437.3 Definitions.
Envelope expansion means any portion of a flight where planned
operations will subject a reusable suborbital vehicle to the effects of
altitude, velocity, acceleration, or burn duration that exceed a level
or duration successfully verified during an earlier flight.
Exclusion area means an area, within an operating area, that a
reusable suborbital vehicle's instantaneous impact point may not
traverse.
Operating area means a three-dimensional region where permitted
flights may take place.
Permitted vehicle means a reusable suborbital rocket or a reusable
launch vehicle that will be launched into a suborbital trajectory or
reentered that is operated by a launch or reentry operator under an
experimental permit.
Reentry impact point means the location of a reusable suborbital
vehicle's instantaneous impact point during its unpowered
exoatmospheric suborbital flight.
0
14. Revise Sec. 437.5 to read as follows:
Sec. 437.5 Eligibility for an experimental permit.
The FAA will issue an experimental permit to a person to launch or
reenter a reusable suborbital vehicle only for--
(a) Research and development to test design concepts, equipment, or
operating techniques;
(b) A showing of compliance with requirements for obtaining a
license under this subchapter; or
(c) Crew training for a launch or reentry using the design of the
reusable suborbital vehicle for which the permit would be issued.
0
15. Amend Sec. 437.7 by revising the introductory text and paragraph
(b) to read as follows:
Sec. 437.7 Scope of an experimental permit.
An experimental permit authorizes launch or reentry of a reusable
suborbital vehicle. The authorization includes pre- and post-flight
ground operations as defined in this section.
* * * * *
(b) A post-flight ground operation includes each operation
necessary to return the reusable suborbital vehicle to a safe condition
after it lands or impacts.
0
16. Revise Sec. 437.9 to read as follows:
[[Page 76727]]
Sec. 437.9 Issuance of an experimental permit.
The FAA issues an experimental permit authorizing an unlimited
number of launches or reentries for a reusable suborbital vehicle
design for the uses described in Sec. 437.5.
0
17. Amend Sec. 437.21 by revising paragraphs (b)(1)(i) and (iv),
(b)(3), (c), and (d) to read as follows:
Sec. 437.21 General.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) General. The FAA is responsible for complying with the
procedures and policies of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
and other applicable environmental laws, regulations, and Executive
Orders to consider and document the potential environmental effects
associated with proposed reusable suborbital vehicle launches or
reentries. An applicant must provide the FAA with information needed to
comply with such requirements. The FAA will consider and document the
potential environmental effects associated with proposed reusable
suborbital vehicle launches or reentries.
* * * * *
(iv) Information requirements. An application must include an
approved FAA Environmental Assessment, Environmental Impact Statement,
categorical exclusion determination, or written re-evaluation covering
all planned permitted activities in compliance with NEPA and the
Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for Implementing the
Procedural Provisions of NEPA.
* * * * *
(3) Human space flight. An applicant proposing to conduct a
permitted operation with a space flight participant, crew, or
government astronaut on board a reusable suborbital vehicle must
demonstrate compliance with Sec. Sec. 460.5, 460.7, 460.11, 460.13,
460.15, 460.17, 460.51, 460.53, 460.59, 460.61, and 460.67 of this
subchapter.
(c) Use of a safety element approval. If an applicant proposes to
use any reusable suborbital vehicle, safety system, process, service,
or personnel for which the FAA has issued a safety element approval
under part 414 of this chapter, the FAA will not reevaluate that safety
element to the extent its use is within its approved scope. As part of
the application process, the FAA will evaluate the integration of that
safety element into vehicle systems or operations.
(d) Inspection before issuing a permit. Before the FAA issues an
experimental permit, an applicant must make each reusable suborbital
vehicle planned to be flown available to the FAA for inspection. The
FAA will determine whether each reusable suborbital vehicle is built as
represented in the application.
* * * * *
0
18. Amend Sec. 437.23 by revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to read as
follows:
Sec. 437.23 Program description.
(a) An applicant must provide--
(1) Dimensioned three-view drawings or photographs of the reusable
suborbital vehicle; and
(2) Gross liftoff weight and thrust profile of the reusable
suborbital vehicle.
(b) An applicant must describe--
(1) All reusable suborbital vehicle systems, including any
structural, flight control, thermal, pneumatic, hydraulic, propulsion,
electrical, environmental control, software and computing systems,
avionics, and guidance systems used in the reusable suborbital vehicle;
(2) The types and quantities of all propellants used in the
reusable suborbital vehicle;
(3) The types and quantities of any hazardous materials used in the
reusable suborbital vehicle;
(4) The purpose for which a reusable suborbital vehicle is to be
flown; and
(5) Each payload or payload class planned to be flown.
0
19. Amend Sec. 437.25 by revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 437.25 Flight test plan.
* * * * *
(c) For each operating area, provide the planned maximum altitude
of the reusable suborbital vehicle.
0
20. Revise and republish Sec. 437.31 to read as follows:
Sec. 437.31 Verification of operating area containment and key
flight-safety event limitations.
(a) An applicant must identify, describe, and provide verification
evidence of the methods and systems used to meet the requirement of
Sec. 437.57(a) to contain its reusable suborbital vehicle's
instantaneous impact point within an operating area and outside any
exclusion area. The description must include, at a minimum--
(1) Proof of physical limits on the ability of the reusable
suborbital vehicle to leave the operating area; or
(2) Abort procedures and other safety measures derived from a
system safety engineering process.
(b) An applicant must identify, describe, and provide verification
evidence of the methods and systems used to meet the requirements of
Sec. 437.59 to conduct any key flight-safety event so that the
reusable suborbital vehicle's instantaneous impact point, including its
expected dispersions, is over unpopulated or sparsely populated areas,
and to conduct each reusable suborbital vehicle flight so that the
reentry impact point does not loiter over a populated area.
0
21. Revise Sec. 437.33 to read as follows:
Sec. 437.33 Landing and impact locations.
An applicant must demonstrate that each location for nominal
landing or any contingency abort landing of the reusable suborbital
vehicle, and each location for any nominal or contingency impact or
landing of a component of that reusable suborbital vehicle, satisfies
Sec. 437.61.
0
22. Amend Sec. 437.53 by revising the introductory text to read as
follows:
Sec. 437.53 Pre-flight and post-flight operations.
A permittee must protect the public from adverse effects of
hazardous operations and systems in preparing a reusable suborbital
vehicle for flight at a launch site in the United States and returning
the reusable suborbital vehicle and any support equipment to a safe
condition after flight. At a minimum, a permittee must--
* * * * *
0
23. Amend Sec. 437.57 by revising paragraphs (a) and (c) to read as
follows:
Sec. 437.57 Operating area containment.
(a) During each permitted flight, a permittee must contain its
reusable suborbital vehicle's instantaneous impact point within an
operating area determined in accordance with paragraph (b) of this
section and outside any exclusion area defined by the FAA in accordance
with paragraph (c) of this section.
* * * * *
(c) The FAA may prohibit a reusable suborbital vehicle's
instantaneous impact point from traversing certain areas within an
operating area by designating one or more areas as exclusion areas, if
necessary to protect public health and safety, safety of property, or
foreign policy or national security interests of the United States. An
exclusion area may be confined to a specific phase of flight.
0
24. Amend Sec. 437.59 by revising paragraph (a) introductory text and
(b) to read as follows:
Sec. 437.59 Key flight-safety event limitations.
(a) A permittee must conduct any key flight-safety event so that
the reusable
[[Page 76728]]
suborbital vehicle's instantaneous impact point, including its expected
dispersion, is over an unpopulated or sparsely populated area. At a
minimum, a key flight-safety event includes:
* * * * *
(b) A permittee must conduct each reusable suborbital vehicle
flight so that the reentry impact point does not loiter over a
populated area.
0
25. Amend Sec. 437.61 by revising the introductory text to read as
follows:
Sec. 437.61 Landing and impact locations.
For a nominal or any contingency abort landing of a reusable
suborbital vehicle, or for any nominal or contingency impact or landing
of a component of that reusable suborbital vehicle, a permittee must
use a location that--
* * * * *
0
26. Revise and republish Sec. 437.71 to read as follows:
Sec. 437.71 Flight rules.
(a) Before initiating flight, a permittee must confirm that all
systems and operations necessary to ensure that safety measures derived
from Sec. Sec. 437.55, 437.57, 437.59, 437.61, 437.63, 437.65, 437.67,
and 437.69 are within acceptable limits.
(b) During all phases of flight, a permittee must--
(1) Follow flight rules that ensure compliance with Sec. Sec.
437.55, 437.57, 437.59, and 437.61; and
(2) Abort the flight if it would endanger the public.
(c) A permittee may not operate a reusable suborbital vehicle in a
careless or reckless manner that would endanger any member of the
public during any phase of flight.
(d) A permittee may not operate a reusable suborbital vehicle in
areas designated in a Notice to Airmen under 14 CFR 91.137, 91.138,
91.141, or 91.145, unless authorized by:
(1) Air Traffic Control; or
(2) A Flight Standards Certificate of Waiver or Authorization.
(e) For any phase of flight where a permittee operates a reusable
suborbital vehicle like an aircraft in the National Airspace System, a
permittee must comply with the provisions of 14 CFR part 91 specified
in an experimental permit issued under this part.
0
27. Amend Sec. 437.85 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 437.85 Allowable design changes; modification of an experimental
permit.
(a) The FAA will identify in the experimental permit the type of
changes that the permittee may make to the reusable suborbital vehicle
design without invalidating the permit.
* * * * *
0
28. Revise Sec. 437.91 to read as follows:
Sec. 437.91 For hire prohibition.
No permittee may carry any property or human being for compensation
or hire on a reusable suborbital vehicle.
0
29. Revise Sec. 437.95 to read as follows:
Sec. 437.95 Inspection of additional reusable suborbital vehicles.
A permittee may launch or reenter additional reusable suborbital
vehicles of the same design under the permit after the FAA inspects
each additional reusable suborbital vehicle.
PART 440--FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
0
30. The authority citation for part 440 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 51 U.S.C. 50901-50923.
0
31. Amend Sec. 440.3 by revising the definitions of ``Maximum probable
loss'', ``Permit'', ``Permitted activity'', and ``Third party'' to read
as follows:
Sec. 440.3 Definitions.
* * * * *
Maximum probable loss (MPL) means the greatest dollar amount of
loss for bodily injury or property damage that is reasonably expected
to result from a licensed or permitted activity;
(1) Losses to third parties, excluding Government personnel and
other launch or reentry participants' employees involved in licensed or
permitted activities and neighboring operations personnel, that are
reasonably expected to result from a licensed or permitted activity are
those that have a probability of occurrence of no less than one in ten
million.
(2) Losses to Government property and Government personnel,
excluding government astronauts, involved in licensed or permitted
activities and neighboring operations personnel that are reasonably
expected to result from licensed or permitted activities are those that
have a probability of occurrence of no less than one in one hundred
thousand.
* * * * *
Permit means an authorization the FAA issues under this subchapter
for the launch or reentry of a reusable suborbital vehicle.
Permitted activity means the launch or reentry of a reusable
suborbital vehicle conducted under a permit issued by the FAA.
* * * * *
Third party means--
(1) Any person other than:
(i) The United States, any of its agencies, and its contractors and
subcontractors involved in launch or reentry services for a licensed or
permitted activity;
(ii) A licensee, permittee, and its contractors and subcontractors
involved in launch or reentry services for a licensed or permitted
activity;
(iii) A customer and its contractors and subcontractors involved in
launch or reentry services for a licensed or permitted activity;
(iv) A member of a crew;
(v) A space flight participant; and
(vi) A government astronaut.
(2) Government personnel, as defined in this section and excluding
government astronauts, are third parties.
* * * * *
0
32. Amend Sec. 440.9 by revising and republishing paragraph (b) to
read as follows:
Sec. 440.9 Insurance requirements for licensed or permitted
activities.
* * * * *
(b) A licensee or permittee must obtain and maintain in effect a
policy or policies of liability insurance, in an amount determined by
the FAA under paragraph (c) of this section, that protects the
following persons as additional insureds to the extent of their
respective potential liabilities against covered claims by a third
party for bodily injury or property damage resulting from a licensed or
permitted activity:
(1) The licensee or permittee, its customer, and their respective
contractors and subcontractors, and the employees of each, involved in
a licensed or permitted activity;
(2) The United States, its agencies, and its contractors and
subcontractors involved in a licensed or permitted activity;
(3) Government personnel; and
(4) Space flight participants. This paragraph (b)(4) shall cease to
be effective on September 30, 2025, unless public law modifies the
limitation in section 50914 of Title 51 of the U.S. Code.
* * * * *
0
33. Amend Sec. 440.17 by revising paragraphs (c) introductory text,
(d) introductory text, (e) introductory text, and (f) and adding
paragraph (g) to read as follows:
Sec. 440.17 Reciprocal waiver of claims requirements.
* * * * *
(c) For each licensed or permitted activity in which the United
States, or
[[Page 76729]]
its contractors and subcontractors, is involved or where property
insurance is required under Sec. 440.9(d), the Federal Aviation
Administration of the Department of Transportation, the licensee or
permittee, and each first-tier customer must enter into a reciprocal
waiver of claims agreement. The reciprocal waiver of claims must be in
a form acceptable to the Administrator, such as those contained in
advisory circular AC 440.17-1, and must provide that:
* * * * *
(d) For each licensed or permitted activity in which the United
States or its contractors and subcontractors are involved, the Federal
Aviation Administration of the Department of Transportation and each
space flight participant must enter into or have in place a reciprocal
waiver of claims agreement. The reciprocal waiver of claims must be in
a form acceptable to the Administrator, such as those contained in
advisory circular AC 440.17-1.
* * * * *
(e) For each licensed or permitted activity in which the United
States or its contractors and subcontractors is involved, the Federal
Aviation Administration of the Department of Transportation and each
crew member must enter into or have in place a reciprocal waiver of
claims agreement. The reciprocal waiver of claims must in a form
acceptable to the Administrator, such as those contained in advisory
circular AC 440.17-1.
* * * * *
(f) The licensee or permittee and each space flight participant
must enter into a reciprocal waiver of claims agreement under which
each party waives and releases claims against the other party to the
waiver, and agrees to assume financial responsibility for property
damage it sustains and for bodily injury or property damage, and to
hold harmless and indemnify each other from bodily injury or property
damage, resulting from a licensed or permitted activity, regardless of
fault. This paragraph (f) shall cease to be effective as of September
30, 2025, unless public law modifies the limitation in section 50914 of
Title 51 of the U.S. Code.
(g) Any waiver, release, assumption of responsibility or agreement
to hold harmless and indemnify pursuant to this section does not apply
to claims for bodily injury or property damage resulting from willful
misconduct of any of the parties to the reciprocal waiver of claims,
the contractors and subcontractors of any of the parties to the
reciprocal waiver of claims, and in the case of licensee or permittee
and customers and the contractors and subcontractors of each of them,
the directors, officers, agents and employees of any of the foregoing,
and in the case of the United States, its agents.
Appendix B Through E to Part 440--[Removed]
0
34. Remove appendices B through E to part 440.
PART 450--LAUNCH AND REENTRY LICENSE REQUIREMENTS
0
35. The authority citation for part 450 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 51 U.S.C. 50901-50923.
0
36. Amend Sec. 450.45 by revising paragraphs (e)(3)(ii)(E) and (e)(5)
to read as follows:
Sec. 450.45 Safety review and approval.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(3) * * *
(ii) * * *
(E) For an unguided suborbital launch vehicle, the location of the
vehicle's center of pressure in relation to its center of gravity for
the entire flight profile.
* * * * *
(5) Human space flight. For a proposed launch or reentry with a
space flight participant, crew, or government astronaut on board a
vehicle, an applicant must demonstrate compliance with Sec. Sec.
460.5, 460.7, 460.11, 460.13, 460.15, 460.17, 460.51, 460.53, 460.59,
460.61, and 460.67 of this chapter.
* * * * *
PART 460--HUMAN SPACE FLIGHT REQUIREMENTS
0
37. The authority citation for part 460 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 51 U.S.C. 50901-50923.
0
38. Add subpart C to read as follows:
Subpart C--Launch and Reentry with a Government Astronaut with a
Safety-Critical Role
Sec.
460.55 Scope.
460.57 Applicability.
460.59 Training of government astronauts with a safety-critical
role.
460.61 Environmental control and life support systems.
Subpart C--Launch and Reentry with a Government Astronaut with a
Safety-Critical Role
Sec. 460.55 Scope.
This subpart establishes requirements for operators and applicants
whose licensed or permitted operations involve government astronauts on
board a vehicle.
Sec. 460.57 Applicability.
This subpart applies to:
(a) An applicant for a license or permit under this chapter who
proposes to have a government astronaut with a safety-critical role on
board a vehicle.
(b) An operator licensed or permitted under this chapter who has a
government astronaut with a safety-critical role on board a vehicle.
Sec. 460.59 Training of government astronauts with a safety-critical
role.
(a) An operator must ensure that each government astronaut with a
safety-critical role is trained on--
(1) How to carry out their safety-critical role on board or on the
ground so that the vehicle will not harm the public; and
(2) Their role in nominal and non-nominal conditions, including
abort scenarios and emergency operations, to the extent that
performance of their role could impact public safety.
(b) An operator must ensure any government astronaut who has the
capability to control, in real time, a launch or reentry vehicle's
flight path during a phase of flight capable of endangering the public:
(1) Receives vehicle and mission-specific training for each phase
of flight capable of endangering the public and over which the
government astronaut has the capability to control the vehicle by using
one or more of the following:
(i) A method or device that simulates the flight;
(ii) An aircraft whose characteristics are similar to the vehicle
or that has similar phases of flight to the vehicle;
(iii) Flight testing; or
(iv) An equivalent method of training approved by the FAA through
the license process.
(2) Trains for each mode of control or propulsion, including any
transition between modes, such that the government astronaut is able to
control the vehicle.
(3) Possesses aeronautical knowledge, experience, and skills
necessary to pilot and control the launch or reentry vehicle that will
operate in the National Airspace System (NAS). Aeronautical experience
may include hours in flight, ratings, and training.
(c) With respect to training device fidelity, an operator must:
(1) Ensure that any government astronaut training device used to
meet the training requirements realistically represents the vehicle's
configuration and mission; or,
[[Page 76730]]
(2) Inform the government astronaut being trained of the
differences between the training device and the vehicle's configuration
and mission.
(d) An operator must update the government astronaut training to
ensure that the training incorporates lessons learned from training and
operational missions including--
(1) Providing traceability to revisions or changes; and
(2) Documenting the completed training for each government
astronaut and maintaining the documentation for each active government
astronaut.
(e) An operator must establish a recurrent training schedule and
ensure that all training of government astronauts performing safety-
critical roles is current before launch or reentry.
(f) For licensed missions supporting U.S. Government contracts,
operators may meet the training requirements of this section through
U.S. Government's contractual requirements.
Sec. 460.61 Environmental control and life support systems.
(a) An operator must provide atmospheric conditions adequate to
sustain life and consciousness for all inhabited areas within a vehicle
that house a government astronaut. The operator must monitor and
control the following atmospheric conditions in the inhabited areas or
demonstrate through the license or permit process that an alternate
means provides an equivalent level of safety--
(1) Composition of the atmosphere, which includes oxygen and carbon
dioxide, and any revitalization;
(2) Pressure, temperature and humidity;
(3) Contaminants that include particulates and any harmful or
hazardous concentrations of gases, or vapors; and
(4) Ventilation and circulation.
(b) An operator must provide an adequate redundant or secondary
oxygen supply for any government astronaut with a safety-critical role.
(c) An operator must provide a redundant means of preventing cabin
depressurization; or prevent incapacitation of any government astronaut
with a safety-critical role in the event of loss of cabin pressure.
0
39. Add subpart D to read as follows:
Subpart D--Launch and Reentry with a Government Astronaut Without a
Safety-Critical Role
Sec.
460.63 Scope.
460.65 Applicability.
460.67 Training of government astronauts without a safety-critical
role.
Subpart D--Launch and Reentry with a Government Astronaut Without a
Safety-Critical Role
Sec. 460.63 Scope.
This subpart establishes requirements for operators and applicants
whose licensed or permitted operations involve government astronauts on
board a vehicle without a safety-critical role.
Sec. 460.65 Applicability.
This subpart applies to:
(a) An applicant for a license or permit under this chapter who
proposes to have a government astronaut without a safety-critical role
on board a vehicle.
(b) An operator licensed or permitted under this chapter who has a
government astronaut without a safety-critical role on board a vehicle.
Sec. 460.67 Training of government astronauts without a safety-
critical role.
An operator must ensure that each government astronaut without a
safety-critical role is trained on how to respond to emergency
situations, including smoke, fire, loss of cabin pressure, and
emergency exit.
Issued under authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 106(f) and 51
U.S.C. 509 in Washington, DC.
Michael Gordon Whitaker,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2024-20900 Filed 9-18-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
