Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 1 / Monday, January 3, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 9 

ARM–1, 800 Independence Avenue, 

SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by 

calling (202) 267–9680. Make sure to 

identify the docket and amendment 

number of this rulemaking. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 1 

Air transportation. 

The Amendments 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

amends part 1 of Title 14, Code of 

Federal Regulations, as follows: 

PART 1—DEFINITIONS AND 

ABBREVIATIONS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 1 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. 

■ 2. Amend the definition of ‘‘light-sport 

aircraft’’ in § 1.1 by revising paragraph 

(8) to read as follows: 

§ 1.1 General definitions. 

* * * * * 

Light-sport aircraft * * * 

(8) A fixed or feathering propeller 

system if a powered glider. 

* * * * * 

Issued in Washington, DC on December 22, 

2010. 

J. Randolph Babbit, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2010–33082 Filed 12–30–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 65 

[Docket No.: FAA–2010–0567; Amendment 

No. 65–55] 

RIN 2120–AJ66 

Modification of the Process for 

Requesting a Waiver of the Mandatory 

Separation Age of 56 for Air Traffic 

Control Specialists 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The FAA amends its 

regulation concerning the process for 

requesting a waiver of the mandatory 

separation age of 56 for Air Traffic 

Control Specialists in flight service 

stations, enroute or terminal facilities, 

and the David J. Hurley Air Traffic 

Control System Command Center. 

Under this final rule, Air Traffic Control 

Specialists will no longer be required to 

certify they have not been involved in 

an operational error (OE), operational 

deviation (OD), or runway incursion in 

the past 5 years. The rule will 

streamline the waiver process and bring 

it into conformance with current FAA 

OE and OD reporting policy. 

DATES: This amendment becomes 

effective March 4, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

technical questions concerning this final 

rule contact Kelly J. Neubecker, 

Airspace, Regulations, and ATC 

Procedures Group, Office of Airspace 

Services, AJV–11, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone (202) 267–9235; facsimile 

(202) 267–9328, e-mail 

Kelly.Neubecker@faa.gov. For legal 

questions concerning this final rule 

contact Anne Moore, Office of Chief 

Counsel, AGC–240, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone (202) 267–3123; facsimile 

(202) 267–7971, e-mail 

Anne.Moore@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

The FAA’s authority to issue rules 

regarding aviation safety is found in 

Title 49 of the United States Code. 

Subtitle I, section 106, describes the 

authority of the FAA Administrator to 

issue, rescind, and revise regulations. 

Under this authority, we are amending 

Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. 

103 in 14 CFR part 65 (SFAR 103) by 

removing paragraph 5.b.vii. The change 

is within the scope of our authority and 

is a reasonable and necessary exercise of 

our statutory obligations. 

I. Background 

On January 23, 2004, H.R. 2673, 

Consolidated Appropriations 2004, 

became Public Law 108–199. Within the 

appropriations bill, there was a mandate 

that ‘‘not later than March 1, 2004, the 

Secretary of Transportation, in 

consultation with the Administrator of 

the Federal Aviation Administration, 

shall issue final regulations, pursuant to 

5 U.S.C. 8335, establishing an 

exemption process allowing individual 

Air Traffic Controllers to delay 

mandatory retirement until the 

employee reaches no later than 61 years 

of age.’’ On January 7, 2005, the FAA 

published the final rule in the Federal 

Register, 14 CFR part 65 (Docket No. 

FAA–2004–17334; SFAR No. 103, 70 FR 

1634). 

The process for an Air Traffic Control 

Specialist (ATCS) to request a waiver 

from the mandatory separation age of 56 

is currently codified in SFAR 103 and 

reflected in the Human Resources Policy 

Bulletin 35, Waiver Process to 

Mandatory Separation at Age 56. This 

policy applies to all ATCSs and their 

first-level supervisors in flight service, 

enroute and terminal facilities, and at 

the David J. Hurley Air Traffic Control 

System Command Center covered under 

the mandatory separation provisions of 

5 U.S.C. 8335(a) and 8425(a). 

The regulation contains information 

contrary to air traffic policy under 

amended FAA Order JO 7210.56C, 

Change 2, effective July 20, 2009. 

Specifically, paragraph 5.b.vii. of SFAR 

103 requires a controller to provide a 

statement that they have not been 

involved in an operational error (OE), 

operational deviation (OD), or runway 

incursion in the last 5 years while in a 

control position. This requirement is 

inconsistent with current air traffic 

orders developed specifically to foster a 

safety culture that encourages full and 

open reporting of safety information and 

focuses on determining why events 

occur, rather than placing blame. In 

support of this culture, FAA Order JO 

7210.56C, Change 2 removed all 

references to employee identification, 

training record entries, performance 

management, and return-to-duty actions 

that were historically tied to reported 

OE or OD events. Due to this change in 

policy, the reporting requirements of 

SFAR 103 5.b.vii. became unverifiable. 

II. Summary of the NPRM 

The FAA published the NPRM on 

June 2, 2010. (75 FR 30742, Docket No. 

FAA 2010–0567) The proposed rule 

invited comments on the proposal to 

remove paragraph 5.b vii of SFAR 103, 

since current practice made those 

provisions unverifiable. The proposed 

rule would amend only the requirement 

for controllers to provide a statement 

that they have not been involved in an 

operational error (OE), operational 

deviation (OD), or runway incursion in 

the last 5 years while in a control 

position. The proposal did not affect 

any other requirements for Air Traffic 

Controllers who request a waiver. 

III. Summary of Comments 

The comment period for the NPRM 

closed on July 2, 2010. The FAA 

received comments from two 

individuals on the proposal to amend 

the exemption process allowing ATC to 

delay mandatory retirement age. Both 

commenters supported waivers to 

extend the retirement age in general, 

and one commenter was also in favor of 

the specific proposal to remove 

documentation of any occurrences 

within the preceding 5 years. The other 

commenter suggested removing the 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
10 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 1 / Monday, January 3, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

1This wage rate is based on 1657.7 hours. 2,080 

hours (52 weeks times 40 hours per week) minus 

422.3 hours (the number of hours a typical 

controller is not available to work) equals 1,657.7. 

mandatory retirement age completely 

and focusing on the controller’s ability 

to concentrate and do their job properly. 

This suggestion, however, was outside 

the scope of the current rulemaking. 

IV. Discussion of the Final Rule 

The FAA is adopting as final the 

proposed rule published on June 2, 

2010. The final rule will become 

effective March 4, 2011. 

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. We 

have determined that there is no new 

information collection requirement 

associated with this rule. 

International Compatibility 

In keeping with U.S. obligations 

under the Convention on International 

Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to 

conform with International Civil 

Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards 

and Recommended Practices to the 

maximum extent practicable. The FAA 

has determined that there are no ICAO 

Standards and Recommended Practices 

that correspond to these regulations. 

V. Regulatory Evaluation, Regulatory 

Flexibility Determination, International 

Trade Impact Assessment, and 

Unfunded Mandates Assessment 

Changes to Federal regulations must 

undergo several economic analyses. 

First, Executive Order 12866 directs that 

each Federal agency shall propose or 

adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned 

determination that the benefits of the 

intended regulation justify its costs. 

Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

of 1980 (Pub. L. 96–354) requires 

agencies to analyze the economic 

impact of regulatory changes on small 

entities. Third, the Trade Agreements 

Act (Pub. L. 96–39) prohibits agencies 

from setting standards that create 

unnecessary obstacles to the foreign 

commerce of the United States. In 

developing U.S. standards, this Trade 

Act requires agencies to consider 

international standards and, where 

appropriate, that they be the basis of 

U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 

104–4) requires agencies to prepare a 

written assessment of the costs, benefits, 

and other effects of proposed or final 

rules that include a Federal mandate 

likely to result in the expenditure by 

State, local, or Tribal governments, in 

the aggregate, or by the private sector, of 

$100 million or more annually (adjusted 

for inflation with base year of 1995). 

This portion of the preamble 

summarizes the FAA’s analysis of the 

economic impacts of this rule. 

Department of Transportation Order 

DOT 2100.5 prescribes policies and 

procedures for simplification, analysis, 

and review of regulations. If the 

expected cost impact is so minimal that 

a proposed or final rule does not 

warrant a full evaluation, this order 

permits that a statement to that effect 

and the basis for it be included in the 

preamble if a full regulatory evaluation 

of the cost and benefits is not prepared. 

The FAA has made such a 

determination for this rule. 

This rule will moderately streamline 

the process for ATCSs who are 

requesting a waiver of mandatory 

separation at age 56 by eliminating a 

paperwork obstacle. Currently, ATCSs 

need to provide a statement to certify 

that they have not been involved with 

an operational error (OE), operational 

deviation (OD), or runway incursion 

within the previous 5 years when 

submitting a request for a waiver of the 

mandatory separation at age 56. This 

rule will eliminate this certification 

requirement by reducing the written 

information ATCSs must provide, 

resulting in a cost saving. 

We estimate ATCSs submit an average 

of 54 statements per year. ATCSs need 

approximately 5 minutes to prepare 

each statement, whereas air traffic 

managers need approximately 15 

minutes to review them. The ATCS’s 

salary including benefits expressed as 

an hourly wage rate with benefits is 

estimated to be $125 per hour; 1 and an 

air traffic manager’s hourly rate with 

benefits is estimated to be $155 per 

hour. 

Using the preceding information, the 

FAA estimates that the total cost savings 

of this final rule will be about $26,000 

or $18,000 present value, as shown in 

Table 1. 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–C 

FAA has, therefore, determined that 

this is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ as defined in section 3(f) of 

Executive Order 12866, and is not 

‘‘significant’’ as defined in DOT’s 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULESER03JA11.023</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 1 / Monday, January 3, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 11 

Regulatory Flexibility Determination 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

(Pub. L. 96–354) (RFA) establishes ‘‘as a 

principle of regulatory issuance that 

agencies shall endeavor, consistent with 

the objectives of the rule and of 

applicable statutes, to fit regulatory and 

informational requirements to the scale 

of the businesses, organizations, and 

governmental jurisdictions subject to 

regulation. To achieve this principle, 

agencies are required to solicit and 

consider flexible regulatory proposals 

and to explain the rationale for their 

actions to assure that such proposals are 

given serious consideration.’’ The RFA 

covers a wide range of small entities, 

including small businesses, not-forprofit organizations, and small 

governmental jurisdictions. 

Agencies must perform a review to 

determine whether a rule will have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. If 

the agency determines that it will, the 

agency must prepare a regulatory 

flexibility analysis as described in the 

RFA. 

However, if an agency determines that 

a rule is not expected to have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities, 

section 605(b) of the RFA provides that 

the head of the agency may so certify 

and a regulatory flexibility analysis is 

not required. The certification must 

include a statement providing the 

factual basis for this determination, and 

the reasoning should be clear. 

This final rule will help extend the 

careers of experienced air traffic 

controllers and thus have no impact on 

private sector entities. Consequently, 

the FAA certifies that the rule will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

International Trade Impact Assessment 

The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 

(Pub. L. 96–39), as amended by the 

Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. 

L. 103–465), prohibits Federal agencies 

from establishing standards or engaging 

in related activities that create 

unnecessary obstacles to the foreign 

commerce of the United States. 

Pursuant to these Acts, the 

establishment of standards is not 

considered an unnecessary obstacle to 

the foreign commerce of the United 

States, so long as the standard has a 

legitimate domestic objective, such as 

the protection of safety, and does not 

operate in a manner that excludes 

imports that meet this objective. The 

statute also requires consideration of 

international standards and, where 

appropriate, that they be the basis for 

U.S. standards. The FAA has assessed 

the potential effect of this final rule and 

determined that it will not affect 

imports as it will have only a domestic 

impact and therefore is not subject to 

these Acts. 

Unfunded Mandates Assessment 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4) 

requires each Federal agency to prepare 

a written statement assessing the effects 

of any Federal mandate in a proposed or 

final agency rule that may result in an 

expenditure of $100 million or more (in 

1995 dollars) in any one year by State, 

local, and Tribal governments, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector; such 

a mandate is deemed to be a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action.’’ The FAA currently 

uses an inflation-adjusted value of 

$143.1 million in lieu of $100 million. 

This rule does not contain such a 

mandate; therefore, the requirements of 

Title II of the Act do not apply. 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

The FAA has analyzed this final rule 

under the principles and criteria of 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism. We 

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, 

does not have federalism implications. 

Regulations Affecting Intrastate 

Aviation in Alaska 

Section 1205 of the FAA 

Reauthorization Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 

3213) requires the FAA, when 

modifying its regulations in a manner 

affecting intrastate aviation in Alaska, to 

consider the extent to which Alaska is 

not served by transportation modes 

other than aviation, and to establish 

appropriate regulatory distinctions. In 

the NPRM, we requested comments on 

whether the proposed rule should apply 

differently to intrastate operations in 

Alaska. We did not receive any 

comments, and we have determined, 

based on the administrative record of 

this rulemaking, that there is no need to 

make any regulatory distinctions 

applicable to intrastate aviation in 

Alaska. 

Environmental Analysis 

FAA Order 1050.1E identifies FAA 

actions that are categorically excluded 

from preparation of an environmental 

assessment or environmental impact 

statement under the National 

Environmental Policy Act in the 

absence of extraordinary circumstances. 

The FAA has determined this 

rulemaking action qualifies for the 

categorical exclusion identified in 

paragraph 312(d) and involves no 

extraordinary circumstances. 

Regulations That Significantly Affect 

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use 

The FAA has analyzed this rule under 

Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations that 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). We 

have determined that it is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under the 

executive order because it is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

Executive Order 12866, and DOT’s 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures, and 

is not likely to have a significant 

adverse effect on the supply, 

distribution, or use of energy. 

Availability of Rulemaking Documents 

You can get an electronic copy of 

rulemaking documents using the 

Internet by— 

1. Searching the Federal eRulemaking 

Portal (http://www.regulations.gov); 

2. Visiting the FAA’s Regulations and 

Policies Web page at http:// 

www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/ or 

3. Accessing the Government Printing 

Office’s Web page at http:// 

www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html. 

You can also get a copy 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) 267–9680. Make sure to 

identify the amendment number or 

docket number of this rulemaking. 

Anyone is able to search the 

electronic form of all comments 

received into any of our dockets by the 

name of the individual submitting the 

comment (or signing the comment, if 

submitted on behalf of an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). You may 

review DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

statement in the Federal Register 

published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 

65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78) or you 

may visit http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act 

The Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 

1996 requires FAA to comply with 

small entity requests for information or 

advice about compliance with statutes 

and regulations within its jurisdiction. If 

you are a small entity and you have a 

question regarding this document, you 

may contact your local FAA official, or 

the person listed under the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT heading at the 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
12 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 1 / Monday, January 3, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

beginning of the preamble. You can find 

out more about SBREFA on the Internet 

at http://www.faa.gov/regulations

_policies/rulemaking/sbre_act/. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 65 

Air traffic controllers, Aircraft, 

Aviation safety. 

The Amendment 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

amends Chapter I of Title 14, Code of 

Federal Regulations, as follows: 

PART 65—CERTIFICATION: AIRMEN 

OTHER THAN FLIGHT 

CREWMEMBERS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 65 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g). 40113, 44701– 

44703, 44707, 44709–44711, 45102–45103, 

45301–45302. 

SFAR 103 [Amended] 

■ 2. Amend SFAR 103 by removing and 

reserving paragraph 5.b.vii. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on December 

22, 2010. 

J. Randolph Babbitt, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2010–33076 Filed 12–30–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 117 

[Docket No. USCG–2010–1096] 

Drawbridge Operation Regulations; 

New Haven Harbor, Quinnipiac and Mill 

Rivers, New Haven, CT 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation 

from regulations. 

SUMMARY: The Commander, First Coast 

Guard District, has issued a temporary 

deviation from the regulation governing 

the operation of the Ferry Street Bridge 

across the Quinnipiac River, mile 0.7, at 

New Haven, Connecticut. The deviation 

allows the bridge to keep one lift span 

closed to facilitate scheduled bridge 

maintenance. 

DATES: This deviation is effective from 

8 a.m. on January 3, 2011 through 5 p.m. 

on January 13, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in 

this preamble as being available in the 

docket are part of docket USCG–2010– 

1096 and are available online at 

http://www.regulations.gov, inserting 

USCG–2010–1096 in the ‘‘Keyword’’ and 

then clicking ‘‘Search’’. They are also 

available for inspection or copying at 

the Docket Management Facility (M–30), 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 

West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this rule, call or 

e-mail Ms. Judy Leung-Yee, Project 

Officer, First Coast Guard District, 

judy.k.leung-yee@uscg.mil, or telephone 

(212) 668–7165. If you have questions 

on viewing the docket, call Renee V. 

Wright, Program Manager, Docket 

Operations, telephone 202–366–9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Ferry 

Street Bridge, across the Quinnipiac 

River at mile 0.7, at New Haven, 

Connecticut, has a vertical clearance in 

the closed position of 25 feet at mean 

high water and 31 feet at mean low 

water. The drawbridge operation 

regulations are listed at 33 CFR 117.213. 

The owner of the bridge, the City of 

New Haven, requested a temporary 

deviation from the regulations to 

facilitate scheduled bridge maintenance, 

replacing pinion couplings and brakes 

at the bridge. 

Under this temporary deviation the 

Ferry Street Bridge may keep one lift 

span in the closed position from 8 a.m. 

on January 3, 2011 through 5 p.m. on 

January 6, 2011, and from 8 a.m. on 

January 10, 2011 through 5 p.m. on 

January 13, 2011. One lift span shall 

remain operational at all times. 

In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), 

the bridge must return to its regular 

operating schedule immediately at the 

end of the designated time period. This 

deviation from the operating regulations 

is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35. 

Dated: December 17, 2010. 

Gary Kassof, 

Bridge Program Manager, First Coast Guard 

District. 

[FR Doc. 2010–33118 Filed 12–30–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket No. USCG–2010–1111] 

RIN 1625–AA87 

Security Zone; On the Waters in Kailua 

Bay, Oahu, HI 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Temporary final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is 

establishing a temporary security zone 

on the waters south of Kapoho Point 

and a nearby channel in Kailua Bay 

within the Honolulu Captain of the Port 

(COTP) Zone. This security zone is 

necessary to ensure the safety of the 

President of the United States, members 

of his official party, and other senior 

government officials. 

DATES: This rule is effective from 

10 a.m. (HST) on December 21, 2010 

through 8 p.m. (HST) on January 5, 

2011. 

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this 

preamble as being available in the 

docket USCG–2010–1111 are available 

online by going to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG– 

2010–1111 in the ‘‘Keyword’’ box, and 

then clicking ‘‘Search’’. They are also 

available for inspection or copying at 

the Docket Management Facility (M–30), 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 

West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this temporary 

rule, call or e-mail Lieutenant 

Commander Marcella Granquist, 

Waterways Management Division, U.S. 

Coast Guard Sector Honolulu; telephone 

808–842–2600, e-mail 

Marcella.A.Granquist@uscg.mil. If you 

have questions on viewing the docket, 

call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, 

Docket Operations, telephone 202–366– 

9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Regulatory Information 

The Coast Guard is issuing this 

temporary final rule without prior 

notice and opportunity to comment 

pursuant to authority under section 4(a) 

of the Administrative Procedure Act 

(APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision 

authorizes an agency to issue a rule 

without prior notice and opportunity to 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES