68360 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

(h) Other FAA AD Provisions 

The following provisions also apply to this 

AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, Standards Office, 

FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs 

for this AD, if requested using the procedures 

found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to 

ATTN: Mike Kiesov, Aerospace Engineer, 

FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, 

Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; 

telephone: (816) 329–4144; fax: (816) 329– 

4090; email: mike.kiesov@faa.gov. Before 

using any approved AMOC on any airplane 

to which the AMOC applies, notify your 

appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the 

FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), 

or lacking a PI, your local FSDO. 

(2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement 

in this AD to obtain corrective actions from 

a manufacturer or other source, use these 

actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective 

actions are considered FAA-approved if they 

are approved by the State of Design Authority 

(or their delegated agent). You are required 

to assure the product is airworthy before it 

is returned to service. 

(i) Special Flight Permit 

Special flight permits are permitted with 

the following limitation: Aerobatic 

maneuvers are prohibited until the actions of 

the AD are complied with. 

(j) Related Information 

Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety 

Agency (EASA) AD No.: 2012–0228R1, dated 

November 13, 2012, for related information. 

You may examine the MCAI on the Internet 

at http://www.regulations.gov by searching 

for and locating it in Docket No. FAA–2013– 

0939. 

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference 

(1) The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

(IBR) of the service information listed in this 

paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR 

part 51. 

(2) You must use this service information 

as applicable to do the actions required by 

this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. 

(i) Alenia Aermacchi Una Societa 

Finmeccanica Mandatory Bollettino Tecnico 

(English Translation: Technical Bulletin) No. 

205B65, Revision 1, dated November 12, 

2012. 

(ii) Alenia Aermacchi Una Societa 

Finmeccanica Mandatory Bollettino Tecnico 

(English Translation: Technical Bulletin) No. 

260SB–136, Revision 1, dated November 12, 

2012. 

(3) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Alenia Aermacchi S.p.A, Via 

Paola Foresio, 1, 21040 Venegono Superiore 

(Varese)—Italy; telephone: 0331–813111; fax: 

0331–827595; Internet: http://

www.aleniaaermacchi.it/en-US/Pages/

custsupp.aspx. 

(4) You may view this referenced service 

information at the FAA, Small Airplane 

Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City, 

Missouri 64106. For information on the 

availability of this material at the FAA, call 

(816) 329–4148. 

(5) You may view this service information 

that is incorporated by reference at the 

National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). For information on 

the availability of this material at NARA, call 

202–741–6030, or go to: http://

www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html. 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on 

October 31, 2013. 

Earl Lawrence, 

Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft 

Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2013–26681 Filed 11–13–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2013–0029; Directorate 

Identifier 2013–NE–01–AD; Amendment 39– 

17599; AD 2013–19–17] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce 

plc Turbofan Engines 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule; correction. 

SUMMARY: The FAA is correcting an 

airworthiness directive (AD) that 

published in the Federal Register. That 

AD applies to all Rolls-Royce plc (RR) 

RB211–535E4–B–37 series turbofan 

engines. The AD number is incorrect in 

the Regulatory text. This document 

corrects that error. In all other respects, 

the original document remains the 

same. 

DATES: This final rule is effective 

November 7, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD 

docket on the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov; or in person at the 

Docket Management Facility between 9 

a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD 

docket contains this AD, the regulatory 

evaluation, any comments received, and 

other information. The address for the 

Docket Office (phone: 800–647–5527) is 

Document Management Facility, U.S. 

Department of Transportation, Docket 

Operations, M–30, West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 

DC 20590. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Robert Green, Aerospace Engineer, 

Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine 

& Propeller Directorate, 12 New England 

Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; 

phone: 781–238–7754; fax: 781–238– 

7199; email: robert.green@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Airworthiness Directive 2013–19–17, 

Amendment 39–17599 (78 FR 61171, 

October 3, 2013), currently requires 

removal of affected parts using a 

drawdown plan for all RR RB211– 

535E4–B–37 series turbofan engines. 

As published, the AD number 2013– 

19–17 under § 39.13 [Amended], is 

incorrect. 

No other part of the preamble or 

regulatory information has been 

changed; therefore, only the changed 

portion of the final rule is being 

published in the Federal Register. 

The effective date of this AD remains 

November 7, 2013. 

Correction of Regulatory Text 

§ 39.13 [Corrected] 

In the Federal Register of October 3, 

2013, on page 61173, in the first 

column, lines 4 and 5, under § 39.13 

[Amended] of AD 2013–19–17, are 

corrected to read as follows: 

* * * * * 

2013–19–17 Rolls-Royce plc: Amendment 

39–17599; Docket No. FAA–2013–0029; 

* * * * * 

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on 

October 25, 2013. 

Colleen M. D’Alessandro, 

Assistant Directorate Manager, Engine & 

Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2013–27190 Filed 11–13–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 91 

[Docket No. FAA–2013–0061] 

Unmanned Aircraft System Test Site 

Program 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of availability of final 

privacy requirements for the unmanned 

aircraft system (‘‘UAS’’) test site 

program; response to comments. 

SUMMARY: On February 22, 2013 the 

FAA published and requested public 

comment on the proposed privacy 

requirements (the ‘‘Draft Privacy 

Requirements’’) for UAS test sites (the 

‘‘Test Sites’’) that the FAA will establish 

pursuant to the FAA Modernization and 

Reform Act of 2012 (‘‘FMRA’’). This 

document responds to the public 

comments received and publishes the 

FAA’s final privacy requirements for the 

Test Sites (the ‘‘Final Privacy 

Requirements’’). 


TKELleY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 68361 

DATES: November 14, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: You may review the public 

docket for this rulemaking (Docket No. 

FAA–2013–0061) on the Internet at 

http://www.regulations.gov. You may 

also review the public docket at the 

Docket Management Facility in Room 

W12–140 of the West Building Ground 

Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590–0001 between 9 

a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

technical questions concerning the test 

site program, contact Elizabeth Soltys, 

Unmanned Aircraft Systems Integration 

Office, Federal Aviation Administration, 

800 Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20591; email: 9-ACTUASTSS@faa.gov. 

For legal questions concerning the 

FAA’s privacy requirements for the Test 

Sites contact Carlos Siso, Office of the 

Chief Counsel, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence Ave. 

SW., Washington, DC 20591; email: 9- 

AGC-UASPrivacy@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

document summarizes and responds to 

the public comments received in 

response to the following Federal 

Register documents seeking public 

comment on the Draft Privacy 

Requirements for the Test Sites: 

(i) Notice of availability and request 

for comments published in the Federal 

Register on February 22, 2013 (78 FR 

12259), Docket No. FAA–2013–0061– 

0001; and 

(ii) Notice of public engagement 

session published in the Federal 

Register on March 28, 2013 (78 FR 

18932), Docket No. FAA–2013–0061– 

0050. 

In addition, this document publishes 

the FAA’s Final Privacy Requirements 

for the Test Sites which are set forth 

under the ‘‘Conclusion’’ section below. 

Discussion of Comments 

The FAA received 99 comments 

through Regulations.gov and 53 

comments through the public 

engagement session. A transcript of the 

public engagement session is available 

at: http://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/ 

uas/media/UAStranscription.pdf. 

Public comments ranged from 

recommending that the FAA not impose 

any privacy requirements on the Test 

Sites to recommending that the FAA 

impose extensive privacy requirements 

on the Test Sites. The FAA also received 

comments that were not responsive to 

the notice or that were unclear. 

The FAA analyzed the responsive 

comments and grouped them into ten 

categories. The following sections 

address the comments by category. 

(1) The FAA should focus on its safety 

mission; it should not engage in 

regulating privacy. 

The FAA received a number of 

comments advocating that the FAA 

should focus on its safety mission and 

should not engage in regulating privacy. 

The following comments were received: 

• The FAA should focus on safety; 

• Regulating privacy is outside the 

FAA’s mission; 

• The FAA does not have statutory 

authority to regulate privacy; 

• The FAA does not have the 

authority to impose privacy 

requirements on the Test Sites; 

• The FAA should allow privacy to 

be addressed by other more appropriate 

government bodies including: Federal 

agencies that have expertise and 

authority to deal with privacy concerns; 

Congress; state or local legislative 

bodies; and the judicial system; 

• The Federal Government should not 

regulate privacy impacts of UAS; these 

issues should be left to states, cities, and 

counties to address; 

• The FAA should only require 

compliance with privacy laws that are 

already in place and focus on 

developing safe operation of UAS; 

• The FAA should not deny access to 

the national airspace for reasons other 

than safety; 

• Existing privacy laws are sufficient 

to cover the responsible use of UAS. 

There already exist Federal, state and 

other laws that protect privacy. In 

addition, tort law may also provide 

avenues of recourse for plaintiffs to 

protect their privacy rights; 

• The FAA should not implement 

privacy regulations that make entry into 

the market prohibitive for small 

businesses; 

• The FAA should not allow privacy 

issues to hinder commercialization of 

UAS; 

• There is no evidence that the 

operations at the Test Sites will harm 

privacy interests. Restricting activities at 

the test sites at this early stage will 

likely overprotect privacy at the expense 

of innovation; 

• The FAA should afford adequate 

time for non-governmental solutions 

such as industry norms and practices to 

develop before intervening 

administratively to protect privacy. 

These less restrictive solutions will 

reduce the need for administrative 

intervention and will allow for 

increased innovation in the national 

airspace; 

• Requiring Test Site operators to 

develop privacy policies that are 

informed by Fair Information Practice 

Principles is onerous for commercial 

operators of UAS and its cost will likely 

outweigh any hypothetical benefits; 

• Requiring Test Site operators to 

issue privacy policies informed by Fair 

Information Practice Principles will 

limit the diversity of data that will 

inform integration of UAS into the 

national airspace. The FAA’s approach 

would exclude an important possible 

alternative from the discussion: some 

operators might choose not to issue a 

privacy policy or adopt a non-FIPPscompliant policy; and 

• The FAA should treat data gathered 

by UAS no differently than data 

gathered by a manned aircraft or by 

other electronic means. There is no 

significant difference in terms of 

surveillance between a UAS and a 

manned aircraft, and manned aircraft 

are permitted to operate in the national 

airspace with cameras. 

Response: The FAA’s mission is to 

provide the safest, most efficient 

aerospace system in the world and does 

not include regulating privacy. At the 

same time, the FAA recognizes that 

there is substantial debate and 

difference of opinion among policy 

makers, industry, advocacy groups, and 

members of the public as to whether 

UAS operations at the Test Sites will 

raise novel privacy issues that are not 

adequately addressed by existing legal 

frameworks. 

The FAA will require the Test Site 

operators to comply with the Final 

Privacy Requirements. Congress 

mandated that the FAA establish the 

Test Sites to further UAS integration 

into the national airspace system. The 

Final Privacy Requirements advance 

this purpose by helping inform the 

dialogue among policymakers, privacy 

advocates, and industry regarding the 

impact of UAS technologies on privacy. 

The FAA’s authority for including the 

Final Privacy Requirements in the Test 

Site OTAs is set forth in 49 U.S.C. 

106(l)(6). That statute authorizes the 

FAA Administrator to enter into an 

OTA ‘‘on such terms and conditions as 

the Administrator may consider 

appropriate.’’ The FAA believes that it 

is appropriate to require Test Site 

operators to comply with the Final 

Privacy Requirements. 

(2) The FAA should require warrants 

before law enforcement can use UAS in 

the Test Sites to conduct surveillance or 

gather evidence. 

The FAA received a variety of 

comments advocating that: 

• The FAA should include provisions 

in the OTA that require warrants to be 

obtained when UAS are used to conduct 

surveillance or gather evidence within 

the Test Site; and 


TKELleY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
68362 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

• The OTA include appropriate 

safeguards to protect Fourth 

Amendment rights at and around our 

national borders. 

Response: The FAA’s mission is to 

provide the safest, most efficient 

aerospace system in the world. The FAA 

is establishing the UAS Test Sites 

consistent with its mission and the 

direction in the FMRA. The FAA 

appreciates the commenters’ concerns. 

Accordingly, the final privacy 

requirements provide that the Site 

Operator and its team members must 

comply with all applicable privacy 

laws. 

(3) The FAA should mandate specific 

privacy requirements for the Test Sites. 

The FAA received a variety of 

comments advocating that the FAA 

mandate specific privacy requirements 

for the Test Sites. The recommendations 

included the following: 

• The FAA should specify minimum 

privacy requirements and require each 

Test Site to comply with them; 

• The FAA should mandate 

compliance with Fair Information 

Practice Principles for all Test Site 

operators; 

• The FAA should establish 

prohibitions on where UAS can operate 

within a Test Site and the kinds of 

surveillance activities that UAS conduct 

at the Test Sites; 

• The FAA should require all UAS 

flown at the Test Sites to have 

unencrypted down links so that all their 

data collection can be viewed by the 

public, including records contained 

onboard and recovered after landing; 

• The FAA should require each Test 

Site operator to conduct a full Privacy 

Impact Assessment; 

• The FAA should require each Test 

Site operator to establish a Chief Privacy 

Officer and centralize privacy 

responsibilities in that person; 

• The FAA should require each Test 

Site operator to establish a privacy 

advisory committee to review proposed 

UAS research at the Test Sites for 

privacy concerns; 

• The FAA should require each Test 

Site operator to provide a detailed 

response to public input it receives 

regarding the Test Site’s privacy policy; 

• The FAA should prohibit the 

sharing of recorded surveillance footage 

beyond the scope of its original purpose; 

• The FAA should prohibit UAS in 

the Test Sites from flying below a 

minimum altitude; 

• The FAA should prohibit UAS in 

the Test Sites from carrying any 

equipment that could be used to 

conduct surveillance; 

• The FAA should limit the use of the 

data collected at the Test Sites; 

• The FAA should prohibit (i) the use 

of Test Sites for government 

surveillance, and (ii) sharing data 

collected with law enforcement for the 

purpose of investigating or prosecuting 

a crime; 

• The FAA should limit the type of 

data that can be collected by UAS at the 

Test Sites including limiting the 

resolution of visual imagery that UAS 

can collect, prohibiting recording of 

audio data, and restricting the ability to 

collect WiFi and cellular signals; 

• The FAA should require Test Site 

operators to provide data on the payload 

of each UAS flown at the Test Site 

including specific information on the 

data the payload is capable of collecting; 

• The FAA should mandate privacy 

policies that require deletion of 

collected data within a certain time 

period; 

• The FAA should prohibit the Test 

Site operator and UAS operators at the 

Test Sites from retaining any data 

collected longer than is necessary to 

fulfill the purpose of the Test Site; 

• The FAA should require UAS 

operators to file data collection 

statements with the FAA for UAS 

operations that involve remote sensing 

and signals surveillance from the UAS 

platform; and 

• The FAA should require UAS 

operating at altitudes over 400 feet to 

carry an automatic dependent 

surveillance-broadcast transponder 

(ADS–B Out) so that UAS operations 

can be tracked. 

Response: The FAA’s mission is to 

provide the safest, most efficient 

aerospace system in the world. 

Although there is a long history of 

placing cameras and other sensors on 

aircraft for a variety of purposes—news 

helicopters, aerial surveys, film/

television production, law enforcement, 

etc.—the FAA is not, through awarding 

and supervising these Test Sites, taking 

specific views on whether or how the 

Federal Government should regulate 

privacy or the scope of data that can be 

collected by manned or unmanned 

aircraft. 

There was substantial difference of 

opinion among commenters as to 

whether UAS operations and manned 

aircraft operations present different 

privacy issues that justify imposing 

special privacy restrictions on UAS 

operations at the Test Sites. In addition, 

there was substantial difference of 

opinion among commenters regarding 

what elements would be appropriate for 

a Test Site privacy policy. Based on the 

comments received, the FAA will 

require Test Sites to comply with the 

following requirements in addition to 

those described in the Draft Privacy 

Requirements: 

(1) Test site operators must maintain 

a record of all UAS operating in the test 

sites; 

(2) Test site operators must require 

every UAS operator in the Test Site to 

have a written plan for the operator’s 

use and retention of data collected by 

the UAS; and 

(3) Test site operators must conduct 

an annual review of test site operations 

to verify compliance with stated privacy 

policy and practices and share those 

outcomes annually in a public forum 

with an opportunity for public feedback. 

The above are reflected in the Final 

Privacy Requirements. 

The FAA has determined that it 

should not impose privacy requirements 

beyond those in the Final Privacy 

Requirements for the following reasons. 

First, there are many privacy laws and 

applications of tort law that may 

address some of the privacy issues that 

arise from UAS operations at the Test 

Sites. 

Second, the FAA believes that Test 

Sites operators will be responsive to 

local stakeholders’ privacy concerns and 

will develop privacy policies 

appropriately tailored to each Test Site. 

The selection criteria for the Test Sites 

specify that only a ‘‘public entity’’ can 

serve as a Test Site operator. The term 

‘‘public entity’’ is defined in the 

selection criteria to mean ‘‘(A) any State 

or local government; (B) any 

department, agency, special purpose 

district, or other instrumentality of a 

State or States or local government; and 

(C) the National Railroad Passenger 

Corporation, and any commuter 

authority.’’ The FAA expects that public 

entities will be responsive to 

stakeholder concerns. 

Third, if UAS operations at a Test Site 

raise privacy concerns that are not 

adequately addressed by the Test Site’s 

privacy policies, elected officials can 

weigh the benefits and costs of 

additional privacy laws or regulations. 

Forty-three states have already enacted 

or are considering legislation regulating 

use of UAS. See Drone Legislation All 

the Rage; Varies Widely Across 43 

States, According to WestlawNext, June 

17, 2013, available at: http://

thomsonreuters.com/press-releases/

062013/drone_legislation_varies_

across_states_according_to_Westlaw. 

(4) The FAA should conduct audits of 

the Test Sites to ensure compliance with 

privacy policies. 

Various commenters recommended 

that the FAA should audit each Test 

Site to ensure compliance with the 

privacy policies in the OTA. 


TKELleY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 68363 

Response: Each Test Site will be 

operated by a public entity (see 

response to Category 3 above). The FAA 

expects that the public entity operating 

each test site will already be subject to 

oversight and audit requirements. The 

FAA does not believe that it is 

appropriate for the FAA to impose 

additional audit requirements on the 

Test Site operators. 

(5) The FAA should require Test Site 

operators to keep records that will allow 

for effective citizen participation and 

reporting of privacy violations. 

One commenter recommended that 

the FAA require Test Site operators to 

keep accurate, detailed, frequent, and 

accessible records to allow for effective 

citizen participation and reporting of 

privacy violations. 

Response: Each Test Site operator will 

be a public entity (see response to 

Category 3 above). Public entities are 

generally subject to laws that establish 

record keeping requirements and 

provide the public access to records. 

The FAA does not believe that it is 

appropriate for the FAA to impose 

additional record keeping requirements 

on the Test Site operators other than 

those specified in the Final Privacy 

Requirements. 

(6) The FAA should establish a 

searchable database or registry of UAS 

operators and operations at the Test 

Sites. 

The FAA received a variety of 

comments advocating that: 

• The FAA should create a public, 

searchable database or registry of all 

UAS operators. Some commenters 

recommended that the database include 

information about surveillance 

equipment used and the operator’s data 

collection practices; 

• The FAA should require UAS 

operators at the Test Sites to provide 

public statements describing the 

surveillance equipment that will be 

carried by a UAS, the geographical area 

where the UAS will be operated, and 

the purposes for which the UAS will be 

deployed; and 

• The FAA should establish a means 

for the public to access the data on UAS 

flights collected by the FAA. 

Response: The FAA believes that it is 

not appropriate for the FAA to create a 

public registry or database of UAS 

operations at the Test Sites. However, 

the FAA has included a contractual 

provision in the Final Privacy 

Requirements that will require each Test 

Site operator to maintain a record of all 

UAS operating at the Test Site. 

(7) The FAA should modify its Test 

Site selection criteria to take into 

account privacy concerns. 

Various commenters recommended 

that the FAA revise its selection criteria. 

Suggestions included the following: 

• The FAA should choose an 

applicant that has an established UAS 

research program with active 

engagement with UAS privacy issues; 

• The FAA should choose at least one 

Test Site in a state with strong privacy 

protective UAS laws and regulations; 

• The FAA should select one or more 

Test Sites in or near a densely 

populated urban area in order to avoid 

a bias towards privacy issues relevant 

for rural UAS operations; and 

• The FAA should consider the 

privacy track record of applicants as 

part of the selection process. 

Response: The FAA believes that it is 

not appropriate to modify the Test Site 

selection criteria to include the 

recommended privacy considerations. 

Applicants have already submitted 

complete applications based on the 

announced selection criteria and the 

application period has closed. 

The FAA published the Test Site 

selection criteria and application 

instructions on February 14, 2013 on 

https://faaco.faa.gov under Solicitation 

number DTFACT–13–R–00002. The 

selection criteria incorporate the factors 

that Congress directed the FAA to 

consider in the FMRA, including, 

geographic and climatic diversity; 

location of ground infrastructure; and 

research needs. The FAA required 

applicants to submit seven volumes of 

extensive and detailed information that 

address a broad set of considerations 

including safety, airspace use, 

experience, research objectives, and risk 

considerations. This information will 

allow the FAA to make a selection based 

on the direction provided by Congress 

in the FMRA and on the FAA’s mission. 

The FAA developed the Test Site 

selection criteria after seeking public 

input and consulting with other 

agencies regarding what selection 

criteria would be appropriate. In March 

2012, the FAA published a request for 

comment in the Federal Register and in 

April 2012, the FAA hosted two public 

webinars to obtain public input on the 

FAA’s proposed selection criteria. 

Although there was significant public 

participation, the FAA did not receive 

comments advocating that privacy 

issues be used as a factor in choosing 

the Test Sites. 

(8) The FAA should require Test Site 

operators to conduct specific tests 

related to privacy and surveillance. 

Commenters recommended that the 

FAA should: 

• Require UAS operators at Test Sites 

to conduct specific tests related to 

surveillance and privacy; 

• Require Test Site operators to 

design the sites—including the creation 

of ‘‘fake’’ houses or businesses—to 

allow UAS operators to test how 

accurate their surveillance systems are 

and test how much data those systems 

collect; and 

• Develop and require Test Sites to 

implement a standard battery of privacy 

tests that each UAS operating within a 

Test Site should have to perform in 

order to collect data that the FAA can 

use to make decisions about privacy 

issues. 

Response: The FAA is not planning to 

have the Test Site operators conduct 

specific research. 

(9) The FAA should not take punitive 

actions against a Test Site operator for 

privacy violations without due process. 

One commenter noted that if charges 

are filed by law enforcement against a 

Test Site operator due to potential 

violations of privacy laws, the OTA 

allows the FAA to suspend or modify 

the relevant operational authority for a 

Test Site (e.g. Certificate of Operation, 

or OTA). That commenter 

recommended that a Test Site operator 

be entitled to due process before the 

operational authority be suspended or 

modified. 

Response: A Test Site operator’s rights 

to operate a Test Site are set forth in the 

OTA and are subject to the terms and 

conditions in the OTA. The FAA 

believes that it is appropriate to include 

contractual provisions in the Final 

Privacy Requirements that allow the 

FAA to protect the public interest by 

suspending or modifying the relevant 

operational authority for a Test Site if 

charges are filed by law enforcement 

against a Test Site operator due to 

potential violations of privacy laws. 

(10) The FAA should establish 

sanctions for violations of privacy 

policies or rights. 

One commenter recommended that 

the FAA rescind the OTA for a Test Site 

where serious privacy violations have 

occurred and levy fines against 

operators that fail to comply with 

privacy policies. 

Response: The Final Privacy 

Requirements provide that violations of 

privacy laws can result in suspension or 

termination of the OTA. 

The FAA will not monitor a Test 

Site’s compliance with its own privacy 

policies. The FAA expects the public 

entities operating the Tests Sites and 

their respective state/local oversight 

bodies to monitor and enforce a Test 

Site’s compliance with its own policies. 

Conclusion 

Based on the comments submitted, 

the FAA intends to require each test site 


TKELleY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
68364 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

operator to comply with all of the 

privacy requirements included in the 

Draft Privacy Requirements as well as 

the following additional privacy 

requirements: 

(1) Test site operators must maintain 

a record of all UAS operating in the test 

sites; 

(2) Test site operators must require 

every UAS operator in the Test Site to 

have a written plan for the operator’s 

use and retention of data collected by 

the UAS; and 

(3) Test site operators must conduct 

an annual review of test site operations 

to verify compliance with stated privacy 

policy and practices and share those 

outcomes annually in a public forum 

with an opportunity for public feedback. 

Accordingly, the FAA intends to 

include the following terms and 

conditions into Article 3 of the OTA: 

‘‘ARTICLE 3 PRIVACY; APPLICABLE 

LAW 

a. Privacy Policies 

The Site Operator must: 

(i) Have privacy policies governing all 

activities conducted under the OTA, 

including the operation and relevant 

activities of the UAS authorized by the 

Site Operator. 

(ii) Make its privacy policies publicly 

available; 

(iii) Have a mechanism to receive and 

consider comments from the public on 

its privacy policies; 

(iv) Conduct an annual review of test 

site operations to verify compliance 

with stated privacy policy and practices 

and share those outcomes annually in a 

public forum with an opportunity for 

public feedback; 

(v) Update its privacy policies as 

necessary to remain operationally 

current and effective; and 

(vi) Ensure the requirements of its 

privacy policies are applied to all 

operations conducted under the OTA. 

The Site Operator’s privacy policies 

should be informed by Fair Information 

Practice Principles. 

b. Compliance With Applicable Privacy 

Laws 

For purposes of this agreement, the 

term ‘‘Applicable Law’’ shall mean (i) a 

law, order, regulation, or rule of an 

administrative or legislative government 

body with jurisdiction over the matter 

in question, or (ii) a ruling, order, 

decision or judgment of a court with 

jurisdiction over the matter in question. 

The Site Operator and its team members 

must operate in accordance with all 

Applicable Law regarding the protection 

of an individual’s right to privacy 

(hereinafter referred to as ‘‘Privacy 

Laws’’). If the U.S. Department of Justice 

or a state’s law enforcement authority 

files criminal or civil charges over a 

potential violation of a Privacy Law, the 

FAA may take appropriate action 

including suspending or modifying the 

relevant operational authority (e.g., 

Certificate of Operation, or OTA) until 

the proceedings are completed. If the 

proceedings demonstrate the operation 

was in violation of the Privacy Law, the 

FAA may terminate the relevant 

operational authority. 

c. Change in Law 

If during the term of this Agreement 

an Applicable Law comes into effect 

which may have an impact on UAS, 

including impacts on the privacy 

interests of individuals or entities 

affected by any operation of any UAS 

operating at the Test Site, such 

Applicable Law will be applicable to the 

OTA and the FAA may update or amend 

the OTA to reflect these changes. 

d. Transmission of Data to the FAA 

The Site Operator should not provide 

or transmit to the FAA or its designees 

any data other than the data the data 

requested by the FAA pursuant to 

Article 5 of this OTA. 

e. Other Requirements 

The Site Operator must: 

(i) Maintain a record of all UAS 

operating at the test sites; and 

(ii) Require each UAS operator in the 

Test Site to have a written plan for the 

operator’s use and retention of data 

collected by the UAS.’’ 

Issued in Washington, DC, on November 7, 

2013. 

Marc L. Warren, 

Acting Chief Counsel, Federal Aviation 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2013–27216 Filed 11–8–13; 11:15 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS 

AFFAIRS 

38 CFR Part 17 

RIN 2900–AN98 

Payment for Home Health Services and 

Hospice Care to Non-VA Providers; 

Delay of Effective Date 

AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs. 

ACTION: Final rule; delay of effective 

date. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Veterans 

Affairs (VA) published in the Federal 

Register on May 6, 2013 (78 FR 26250) 

a final rule to change the billing 

methodology for non-VA providers of 

home health services and hospice care. 

The preamble of that final rule stated 

the effective date was November 15, 

2013. This document delays that 

effective date to April 1, 2014. 

DATES: Effective Date: The effective date 

for the final rule published May 6, 2013, 

at 78 FR 26250, is delayed from 

November 15, 2013, until April 1, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Harold Bailey, Director of 

Administration, Department of Veterans 

Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, 

3773 Cherry Creek Drive North, East 

Tower, Ste. 485, Denver, CO 80209, 

(303) 331–7829. (This is not a toll-free 

number.) 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

rulemaking makes the VA regulation 

governing payments for certain non-VA 

health care, 38 CFR 17.56, applicable to 

non-VA home health services and 

hospice care. Section 17.56 provides, 

among other things, that Centers for 

Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) fee 

schedule or prospective payment system 

amounts will be paid to certain non-VA 

providers, unless VA negotiates other 

payment amounts with such providers. 

See 38 CFR 17.56(a)(2)(i). This change 

in the billing methodology for non-VA 

home health and hospice care was put 

forth in a proposed rule. We received 

one comment to this change and 

responded to that comment in a final 

rule published in the Federal Register 

on May 6, 2013 (78 FR 26250). The 

original effective date of the final rule 

was stated as November 15, 2013; 

however, we now delay the effective 

date of the final rule at 78 FR 26250 to 

the new effective date of April 1, 2014. 

The delay of the effective date is 

necessary to accommodate unforeseen 

difficulties in contracting and 

information technology procedures 

required to apply the billing 

methodology under § 17.56 to non-VA 

home health services and hospice care. 

These difficulties relate to separate 

administration of hospice care and 

home health services by the Veterans 

Health Administration’s Office of 

Geriatrics and Extended Care, which 

uses separate methods for forming 

agreements with non-VA providers for 

the provision of these services, and 

difficulties regarding information 

technology systems necessary to use the 

CMS rate made applicable under 

§ 17.36. 

Dated: November 8, 2013. 

Robert C. McFetridge, 

Director, Regulation Policy and Management, 

Office of the General Counsel, Department 

of Veterans Affairs. 

[FR Doc. 2013–27218 Filed 11–13–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8320–01–P 


TKELleY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES