“Rules of Practice in Air Safety Proceedings”
Final Rule. September 19, 2013.
At issue here is the balance of power between a pilot controverting the terms of his or her licensure with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and the FAA.
As occurs in other aviation policy settings, here there are material policy differences between the FAA and NTSB and the FAA comments to these rules changes and responses by the NTSB reflect them.
General idea: More fairness to pilots subject to FAA actions against their certificates, emphasizing more timely and complete access to information the FAA (prosecuting authority in such cases) has against the subject pilots
- Rules designed to encourage the FAA to get its Enforcement Investigative Report to the pilot, or the FAA risks NTSB dismissal of the action or other appropriate corrective action against the FAA’s case.
- Federal Rules of Evidence and Federal Rules of Civil now apply “to the extent practicable”.
- Pilots will now have the right to appeal final NTSB orders in either federal district court or the federal court of appeals.
“Adoption of Statutory Prohibition on the Operation of Jets Weighing 75,000 Pounds or Less That Are Not Stage 3 Noise Compliant”
Final Rule; Disposition of Comments. September 20, 2013.
Here the manufacturer of the CJ 610 engine for Dassault Falcon 20 aircraft, GE Aviation, undertakes to correct “inaccuracies in the section discussing Hush Kits”, in a final rule dated July 2, 2013 that implemented recent legislation (the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012) that mandated Stage 3 Noise Compliance for business jets (“maximum weight of 75,000 pounds or less”).
GE Aviation pointed out in its comments on the final rule that there was in fact a hush kit available to bring such engines on Falcon 20’s into Stage 3 Noise compliance.
GE Aviation’s letter of correction and comment is available here (click on the blue type, “Adoption of Statutory Prohibition on the Operation of Jets Weighing 75,000 Pounds or Less That Are Not Stage 3 Noise Compliant”).
“Rules of Practice for Federally-Assisted Airport Enforcement Proceedings (Retrospective Regulatory Review)”
September 12, 2013. Final Rule.
“It improves efficiency by enabling parties to file submissions with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) electronically, and by incorporating modern business practices into how the FAA handles complaints. This amendment is necessary to reflect changes in applicable laws and regulations, and to apply lessons learned since the existing rules were implemented in 1996.” Continue reading
“Access to Aircraft Situation Display to Industry (ASDI) and National Airspace System Status Information (NASSI) Data”
August 21, 2013. Final Notice Of The Process For Limiting Aircraft Data Displayed Via ASDI.
ASDI is a data feed hosted by U.S. DOT’s Volpe Center. This data feed is made available to airlines for purposes of safety. It includes information about aircraft location, together with data relating to altitude, airspeed, destination and various additional points. Continue reading
Note well: Concerning Enhanced Flight Vision Systems, the proposed advisory circular about EFVS operations covers substantially the entire waterfront of aviation operations – Parts 91 (general operating and flight rules), 121 (scheduled air carrier), 125 (certification of larger aircraft – 20 or more passengers or maximum payload capacity 6,000 pounds or more), 129 (foreign air carriers and foreign operators), and 135 (commuter and on-demand operations) of the Federal Aviation Regulations.
“Availability of Draft Advisory Circular (AC) 90-106A and AC 20-167A”
August 13, 2013. Notice of Availability for Comment. Continue reading
FAA’s reasoning: “As, new technology facilitates the introduction of area navigation (RNAV) instrument approach procedures over the past decade, the number of procedures available in the National Airspace System has nearly doubled. The complexity and cost to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) of maintaining the existing ground based navigational infrastructure while expanding the new RNAV capability is not sustainable.”
“Proposed Policy for Discontinuance of Certain Instrument Approach Procedures”
August 2, 2013. Notice Of Proposed Policy And Request For Comment.
FAA announcement available here.
Plan itself available here.
FAA press release available here.
“Flight Data Recorder Airplane Parameter Specification Omissions and Corrections.”
July 3, 2013. Final Rule; Request for comments.
“This final rule amends three appendices in 14 CFR related to flight data recorder (FDR) requirements.
First, Appendix E to part 91 is amended to correct what appears to be a typographical error introduced when the rule was published. Currently, for the altitude parameter, the sampling rate per second is listed as 11. The correct rate has always been 1 sample per second. A review of the original typewritten document that was submitted for publication suggests that a stray mark caused the number to be translated as 11. The sample rate of 1 per second was in the proposed rule (53 FR 4314; February 12, 1988) and the final rule (54 FR 34284; August 18, 1989). Since a sample rate of 11 is unknown in the industry and compliance would require a major airplane equipment modification, affected operators have understood that this was a typographical error, and complied with the 1 sample per second rate. Despite the age of the error, this correction does not comprise the adoption of a different standard that will affect airplanes operating under these regulations since any initial misunderstandings have been clarified when the agency was contacted.”
“The second and third corrections concern identical standards in Appendix M to part 121 and Appendix E to part 125. In each Appendix, footnote 5 was added following a petition for rulemaking from Airbus Industries and subsequent rulemaking to adopt the changes (64 FR 46117; August 24, 1999), as evidenced by the discussion in the preamble to that rule. However, the current regulation lists only the adjustment for the resolution, and not the sampling interval. This action puts the sampling interval of once per second back in to the footnote for the affected airplanes. Since the airplane can be operated under parts 121 or 125 using the identical standard, the appendices for each are being corrected.”
“None of these changes will require action by airplane owners, operators or manufacturers as the affected airplanes already comply with the requirements of the originally adopted rules and the corrections adopted here. Since these requirements were intended in the original rules, there is no new impact on safety. The correction of these errors and omissions will prevent future confusion and require less contact between the FAA and regulated entities who must comply with the regulations.”