6082 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 22 / Monday, February 3, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

Concentrator: means the AirSep 

FreeStyle, AirSep LifeStyle, AirSep 

Focus, AirSep Freestyle 5, Delphi RS– 

00400, DeVilbiss Healthcare iGo, Inogen 

One, Inogen One G2, Inogen One G3, 

Inova Labs LifeChoice, Inova Labs 

LifeChoice Activox, International 

Biophysics LifeChoice, Invacare XPO2, 

Invacare Solo2, Oxlife Independence 

Oxygen Concentrator, Oxus RS–00400, 

Precision Medical EasyPulse, 

Respironics EverGo, Respironics 

SimplyGo, SeQual Eclipse, SeQual 

eQuinox Oxygen System (model 4000), 

SeQual Oxywell Oxygen System (model 

4000), SeQual SAROS and VBOX 

Trooper Oxygen Concentrator medical 

device units as long as those medical 

device units: (1) Do not contain 

hazardous materials as determined by 

the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 

Safety Administration; (2) are also 

regulated by the Food and Drug 

Administration; and (3) assist a user of 

medical oxygen under a doctor’s care. 

These units perform by separating 

oxygen from nitrogen and other gases 

contained in ambient air and dispensing 

it in concentrated form to the user. 

Section 3. Operating Requirements— 

(a) No person may use and no aircraft 

operator may allow the use of any 

portable oxygen concentrator device, 

except the AirSep FreeStyle, AirSep 

LifeStyle, AirSep Focus, AirSep 

FreeStyle 5, Delphi RS–00400, DeVilbiss 

Healthcare iGo, Inogen One, Inogen One 

G2, Inogen One G3, Inova Labs 

LifeChoice, Inova Labs LifeChoice 

Activox, International Biophysics 

LifeChoice, Invacare XPO2, Invacare 

Solo2, Oxlife Independence Oxygen 

Concentrator, Oxus RS–00400, Precision 

Medical EasyPulse, Respironics EverGo, 

Respironics SimplyGo, SeQual Eclipse, 

SeQual eQuinox Oxygen System (model 

4000), SeQual Oxywell Oxygen System 

(model 4000), SeQual SAROS and 

VBOX Trooper Portable Oxygen 

Concentrator units. These units may be 

carried on and used by a passenger on 

board an aircraft provided the aircraft 

operator ensures that the following 

conditions are satisfied: 

* * * * * 

Issued under authority provided by 49 

U.S.C. 106(f) and 44701(a)(5) in Washington, 

DC, on December 23, 2013. 

Michael P. Huerta, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2014–02121 Filed 1–31–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Parts 121, 125, and 135 

[Docket No.: FAA–2012–1059; Amdts. No.: 

121–368, 125–63, 135–128] 

RIN 2120–AK11 

Minimum Altitudes for Use of 

Autopilots 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This rulemaking amends and 

harmonizes minimum altitudes for use 

of autopilots for transport category 

airplanes; it also enables the operational 

use of advanced autopilot and 

navigation systems by incorporating the 

capabilities of current and future 

autopilots, flight guidance systems, and 

Global Navigation Satellite System 

(GNSS) guidance systems while 

protecting the continued use of legacy 

systems at current autopilot minimum 

use altitudes. Additionally, this final 

rule implements a performance-based 

approach, using the certified 

capabilities of autopilot systems as 

established by the Airplane Flight 

Manual (AFM) or as approved by the 

Administrator. 

DATES: Effective April 4, 2014. 

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’’ section of this 

document. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

technical questions concerning this 

action, contact Kel O. Christianson, 

FAA, Aviation Safety Inspector, 

Performance Based Flight Systems 

Branch (AFS–470), Flight Standards 

Service, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone 202–385–4702; email 

Kel.christianson@faa.gov. 

For legal questions concerning this 

action, contact Robert H. Frenzel, 

Manager, Operations Law Branch, Office 

of the Chief Counsel, Regulations 

Division (AGC–220), Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone 202–267–3073; email 

Robert.Frenzel@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

The FAA’s authority to issue rules on 

aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the 

United States Code. This rulemaking is 

promulgated under the authority 

described in 49 U.S.C. 106(f), which 

establishes the authority of the 

Administrator to promulgate regulations 

and rules and 49 U.S.C. 44701(a)(5), 

which requires the Administrator to 

promulgate regulations and minimum 

standards for other practices, methods, 

and procedures necessary for safety in 

air commerce and national security. 

This amendment to the regulation is 

within the scope of that authority 

because it prescribes an accepted 

method for ensuring the safe operation 

of aircraft while using autopilot 

systems. 

I. Overview of Final Rule 

The FAA amends and harmonizes 

minimum altitudes for use of autopilots 

for transport category airplanes in order 

to streamline and simplify these 

operational rules. This final rule enables 

the operational use of advanced 

autopilot and navigation systems by 

incorporating the capabilities of existing 

and future autopilots, flight guidance 

systems, and GNSS guidance systems 

while protecting the continued use of 

legacy systems. This allows the FAA to 

enable the benefits of Next Generation 

Air Transportation System (NextGen) 

technologies and procedures (Optimized 

Profile Descents, Performance Based 

Navigation (PBN)) to enhance aviation 

safety in the National Airspace System 

(NAS). This final rule also gives the 

FAA Administrator the authorization to 

require an altitude higher than the AFM 

if the Administrator believes it to be in 

the interest of public safety. 

Currently, operators have a choice 

whether or not to update their aircraft 

with new autopilots as they are 

developed and certified by equipment 

manufacturers. This final rule does not 

affect this decision-making process and 

protects operators to continue operating 

as they do today. As a result, this action 

does not impose any additional costs on 

certificate holders that operate under 

parts 121, 125, or 135. Also, by setting 

new minimum altitudes for each phase 

of flight that approved equipment may 

operate to, this final rule gives 

manufacturers more certainty that new 

products can be used as they are 

developed. 

In response to Executive Order 13563 

issued by President Obama on January 

18, 2011, this rule was identified for 

inclusion in the Department of 

Transportation Retrospective Regulatory 

Review (May 2011), noting that the 

current minimum altitudes for use of 

autopilots were unduly restrictive and 

would limit the ability to use new 

technologies. On May 10, 2012, 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 22 / Monday, February 3, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 6083 

President Obama signed Executive 

Order 13610, establishing the 

Retrospective Regulatory Review as an 

on-going obligation. The final rule is 

consistent with the requirement in 

Executive Order 13610 to modify or 

streamline regulations ‘‘in light of 

changed circumstances, including the 

rise of new technologies.’’ 

II. Background 

A. Statement of the Problem 

The FAA and Civil Aeronautics 

Administration (CAA) (the predecessor 

to the FAA) technical standards for 

autopilot systems date back to 1947. 

These standards have been revised eight 

times since 1959, but the operating rules 

for autopilot minimum use altitudes in 

14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) 

§§ 121.579, 125.329, and 135.93 have 

not been amended in any significant 

way since the recodification of the Civil 

Aviation Regulations (CAR) and Civil 

Aviation Manuals (CAM) on December 

31, 1964. 

By contrast, autopilot certification 

standards contained in 14 CFR 25.1329 

were updated as recently as April 11, 

2006. Consequently, operational 

regulations in parts 121, 125, and 135 

do not adequately reflect the capabilities 

of modern technologies in use today and 

thus make it difficult to keep pace with 

the FAA’s implementation of NextGen. 

B. History 

The FAA published an NPRM in the 

Federal Register on December 9, 1994 

(59 FR 63868) based on a 

recommendation from the Autopilot 

Engagement Working Group of the 

Aviation Rulemaking Advisory 

Committee (ARAC) to change the 

existing rules concerning engagement of 

autopilots during takeoff. The ARAC 

determined that the increased use of an 

autopilot during takeoff would enhance 

aviation safety by giving pilots greater 

situational awareness of what was going 

on inside and outside of the aircraft. 

This benefit would be realized by 

reducing the task loading required to 

manually fly the aircraft during the 

critical takeoff phase of flight. The FAA 

received seven comments in response to 

the NPRM, and all commenters 

supported an amendment to the rule. 

In 1997, the FAA amended 

§§ 121.579, 125.329, and 135.93 to 

permit certificate holders the use of an 

approved autopilot system for takeoff, 

based on the 1994 NPRM and an 

expectation that autopilot technology 

would continue to advance (62 FR 

27922; May 21, 1997). This 

authorization was given to certificate 

holders through an Operations 

Specification (OpSpec), which was 

implemented as a stopgap measure. The 

rule itself was not changed to provide 

manufacturers and operators the 

guidance for producing and operating 

new aircraft capable of attaining lower 

autopilot minimum use altitudes. The 

amendment also failed to address 

autopilot minimum use altitudes on 

instrument approaches or harmonize 14 

CFR parts 121, 125 and 135. 

C. ARAC Efforts To Amend Autopilots 

Rules 

Since 1997, multiple groups have 

been formed to review current 

regulations and autopilot technologies. 

The FAA Transport Airplane Directorate 

initiated an effort under the ARAC 

Flight Guidance Harmonization 

Working Group to evaluate the status of 

current autopilot technologies, rules and 

guidance along with the harmonization 

of U.S. policy and guidance with the 

Joint Aviation Authorities. Later, the 

Performance-based operations Aviation 

Rulemaking Committee, which 

established the Autopilot Minimum Use 

Height (MUH) action team, evaluated 

autopilot minimum use altitudes and 

made recommendations to the Associate 

Administrator for Aviation Safety. The 

team was specifically tasked with 

developing recommendations to address 

progress in the area of PBN and the 

subsets of area navigation (RNAV) and 

required navigation performance (RNP) 

operations. The team’s conclusions 

aligned with the previous groups’ 

acknowledgement that §§ 121.579, 

125.329 and 135.93 were outdated and 

recommended new rulemaking to take 

advantage of advancements in modern 

aircraft technologies and the certified 

capabilities of autopilot systems to 

create a performance-based structure to 

aid in the implementation of NextGen 

flight operations. 

D. Summary of the NPRM 

The FAA published an NPRM in the 

Federal Register on December 4, 2012 

(77 FR 71735), proposing to enable the 

operational use of advanced autopilot 

and navigation systems by incorporating 

the capabilities of current and future 

autopilots, flight guidance systems, and 

GNSS guidance systems while 

protecting the continued use of legacy 

systems. The NPRM proposed to 

accomplish this through a performancebased approach, using the certified 

capabilities of autopilot systems as 

established by the Airplane Flight 

Manual (AFM) or as approved by the 

Administrator. The comment period 

closed on February 4, 2013. 

E. General Overview of Comments 

The FAA received 3 public 

comments. The National Business 

Aviation Association (NBAA) provided 

one comment supporting the rule. The 

second commenter focused on the 

definitions and terms used in the 

regulatory text and the third commenter 

requested a clarification of the 

regulatory text. 

III. Discussion of Public Comments and 

Final Rule 

A. Revise Minimum Altitudes for Use of 

Autopilot (§ 121.579, 125.329 and 

135.93) 

A commenter suggested that 

Threshhold Elevation (THRE) be added 

to the definition of TDZE to read, 

‘‘touchdown zone/threshold elevation’’ 

(TDZE). The suggestion was made based 

on the fact that, at the time of the 

NPRM, TDZEs were being replaced with 

THREs on instrument approach plates 

(IAPs) in the NAS. This resulted in 

instrument approach plates published 

with either a TDZE or THRE. The 

comment was suggested so that the rule 

would reference both terms, thus 

allowing both terms to be used by the 

pilots as a reference for adding the 

applicable altitudes or heights 

published in the AFM. 

The policy to change TDZE to THRE 

has been rescinded. TDZE will now be 

the standard and will replace THRE on 

IAPs that are currently published with 

THRE. Based on this, the FAA has 

decided that TDZE will remain the only 

term used in this final rule. As a result, 

this final rule will allow operators to 

add the applicable altitudes or heights 

published in the AFM to the airport 

elevation and TDZE published on the 

instrument approach plate. This will 

provide a standard reference for all 

operators and manufacturers using and 

producing Flight Management Systems 

(FMS). 

The third commenter suggested 

clarifying the regulatory text as it related 

to the base minimum use altitude for an 

approach and how §§ 91.175 and 91.155 

weather conditions are used when 

applying autopilot minimums. The FAA 

agrees with the comment and has 

clarified this particular section. 

Specifically, the FAA has realigned the 

regulatory text and placed into separate 

paragraphs the specific conditions that 

must be met in order to apply the 

autopilot minimums. 

This final rule is a complete rewrite 

of §§ 121.579, 125.329 and 135.93. The 

language in each section of the 

regulations is identical except for an 

additional paragraph in § 135.93 

exempting rotorcraft. This final rule 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
6084 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 22 / Monday, February 3, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

harmonizes these three parts of 14 CFR 

because this final rule is based on the 

performance capabilities of the 

equipment being utilized, not the 

operating certificate held. Nothing in 

this final rule will prevent or adversely 

affect the continued safe operation of 

aircraft using legacy navigation systems. 

Furthermore, this action defines 

altitude references for the different 

phases of flight, whereas the original 

rule defined all altitudes with reference 

to terrain. Altitudes for takeoff/initial 

climb and go-around/missed approach 

are defined as above the airport 

elevation. Altitudes for enroute 

operations are defined as above terrain 

elevation. Altitudes used for approach 

are defined as being above Touchdown 

Zone Elevation (TDZE). If the altitude is 

in reference to a Decision Altitude/

Height (DA(H)) or Minimum Descent 

Altitude (MDA), the altitude will be 

defined in relation to the DA(H) or MDA 

itself (e.g. 50 ft. below DA(H)). Upon 

further review of the proposed 

regulatory text, the FAA is removing 

subparagraph (a)(4) from each of these 

sections. The language ‘‘Altitudes 

defined as being above airport elevation, 

TDZE or terrain are above ground level 

(AGL)’’ as proposed in the NPRM is 

redundant. The provisions defining the 

altitude references in subparagraphs 

(a)(1), (a)(2) and (a)(3) are sufficient to 

define the elevations that will be used 

to calculate the autopilot minimum use 

height/altitude for each phase of flight. 

This final rule is formatted to model 

the actual phases of flight: takeoff 

through landing or go-around/missed 

approach. Each paragraph in this final 

rule has a base minimum autopilot use 

altitude for the intended phase of flight 

that all aircraft may utilize. In order to 

protect the use of all legacy systems, the 

base altitudes will remain identical to 

the altitudes in the current rule. Lower 

minimum use altitudes are based on 

certification of the autopilot system and 

limitations found in the AFM. The 

enroute minimum use altitude will not 

change from the current rule. 

Additionally, the minimum use altitude 

in each paragraph can be raised by the 

Administrator if warranted by an 

operational or safety need. 

No other comments were received on 

these three sections and they are 

adopted as proposed. 

B. Takeoff and Initial Climb (§§ 121.579 

(b), 125.329(b) and 135.93(b)) 

The current rule defines the base 

minimum altitude at which all aircraft 

may engage the autopilot after takeoff as 

500 ft. or double the autopilot altitude 

loss (as specified in the AFM) above the 

terrain, whichever is higher. The current 

rule also gives the Administrator the 

authority to use OpSpecs to authorize a 

lower minimum engagement altitude on 

takeoff, which must be specified in the 

AFM. 

This final rule retains the same 

minimum altitudes for all aircraft to 

protect legacy systems and introduces 

the ability to use a lower engagement 

altitude on takeoff/initial climb based 

upon the certified limits of the autopilot 

as specified in the AFM. This final rule 

also gives the Administrator the 

authority to specify an altitude above, 

but not below, that specified in the 

AFM. 

As a result, this final rule establishes 

the AFM as a performance-based 

standard by which a certificate holder 

may be authorized for operations 

through its OpSpecs. Once an 

autopilot’s capabilities and limitations 

are certified and reflected in the AFM, 

a certificate holder may request a 

change to its OpSpecs to authorize use 

of the new autopilot minimum use 

altitude specified in the AFM. No 

comments were received on these three 

sections and they are adopted as 

proposed. 

C. Enroute (§§ 121.579(c), 125.329(c) 

and 135.93(c)) 

The enroute paragraph of the current 

rule specifies a minimum use altitude of 

500 ft. above terrain, or an altitude that 

is no lower than twice the autopilot 

altitude loss specified in the AFM, 

whichever is higher, for all operations. 

This final rule maintains the same base 

minimum use altitude as the current 

rule, while granting the Administrator 

the authority to specify a higher altitude 

if required by an operational or safety 

related need. 

No comments were received on these 

three sections and they are adopted as 

proposed. 

D. Approach (§§ 121.579(d), 125.329(d), 

135.93(d)) 

The base minimum use altitude for an 

approach in this final rule will remain 

the same as the current rule. Aircraft 

with a specified height loss may use an 

autopilot no lower than 50 ft. below the 

DA (H) or MDA or twice the altitude 

loss specified in the AFM, whichever is 

greater. The current rule allows for 

exceptions to this altitude with the use 

of a coupled autopilot, instrument 

landing system (ILS), and specified 

reported weather conditions. 

This final rule is written to allow 

current operators the ability to operate 

as they do now (thereby protecting 

legacy systems), while also allowing 

operators with updated systems to attain 

lower minimum use heights. If an 

operator has an approved autopilot that 

can fly a coupled approach, ILS or other 

than the ILS, it may use the AFM 

specified ‘‘altitude loss’’ or 

Administrator directed height as the 

basis for disconnecting the autopilot on 

the approach. In instrument flight rules 

(IFR) conditions or operations in less 

than visual flight rules (VFR), the 

aircraft is below the MDA or DA and 

pilot has § 91.175 references, the 

disengage height remains ‘‘altitude loss 

plus 50 ft.’’ In VFR conditions, the 

operator may use the ‘‘altitude loss’’ as 

the disengage height or 50 ft., whichever 

is higher. This final rule allows the 

aircraft to be used down to a lower 

minimum use height based on the AFM 

limitation and the ability of the pilot to 

immediately recognize a possible 

autopilot deviation by using visual 

references outside the aircraft. 

No other comments were received on 

these three sections and they are 

adopted as proposed. Sections 

121.579(d), 125.329(d), and 135.93(d) 

appear in the final rule with the changes 

as described for paragraphs (d)(1). 

E. Go Around/Missed Approach 

(§§ 121.579(e), 125.329(e) and 135.93(e)) 

The final rule provides guidance for 

executing a missed approach/go-around 

that the current rule lacks. This 

guidance is first presented in the 

approach paragraph, wherein an aircraft 

does not need to comply with the 

autopilot minimum use altitude of that 

paragraph provided it is executing a 

coupled missed approach/go-around. A 

new subparagraph provides guidance on 

when the autopilot can be engaged on 

the missed approach/go-around when 

accomplished. 

No comments were received on these 

three sections and they are adopted as 

proposed. 

F. Landing (§§ 121.579(f), 125.329(f) and 

135.93(f)) 

The last paragraph in this final rule 

provides guidance for landing. Current 

language authorizes the Administrator, 

through OpSpecs, to allow an aircraft to 

touchdown with the autopilot engaged 

using an approved autoland flight 

guidance system. This authorization 

relies upon an ILS to meet this 

requirement. This final rule states that 

minimum use altitudes do not apply to 

autopilot operations when an approved 

and authorized landing system mode is 

being used for landing. This final rule 

will not limit approved landing systems 

to ground based systems. This action 

will allow new performance based 

landing systems to be approved and 

implemented for autoland operations as 

they become available. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 22 / Monday, February 3, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 6085 

No comments were received on these 

three sections and they are adopted as 

proposed. 

G. Rotorcraft Operations (§ 135.93(g)) 

The current rule expressly excludes 

rotorcraft operations from the minimum 

altitudes for use of autopilots. This final 

rule continues to exclude rotorcraft 

operations. 

No comments were received on 

§ 135.93(g), and it appears as proposed. 

IV. Regulatory Notices and Analyses 

A. Regulatory Evaluation 

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 final 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. 

A full regulatory evaluation was not 

prepared for this final rule. The 

reasoning for this determination 

follows: 

Benefits 

This final rule incorporates the 

capabilities of current autopilots and 

will allow operators to more readily 

utilize the capabilities of future 

autopilots, flight guidance systems, and 

GNSS guidance systems as they are 

developed. These new capabilities 

accelerate the benefits of NextGen 

technologies and procedures that 

depend upon auto flight guidance 

systems to enhance aviation safety in 

the NAS. If operators pursue the lower 

minimum altitudes based on their 

autopilots’ certification, they will 

realize benefits from increased ability to 

operate. 

Costs 

This final rule specifies autopilot 

minimum use altitudes for parts 121, 

125 and 135 operators. This final rule is 

based on the capabilities of the aircraft 

and the minimum use altitudes or lack 

of minimum use altitudes published in 

the AFM. This final rule does not affect 

the minimum use altitudes presently 

used by operators in the NAS. Operators 

have the option to operate as they 

currently do or pursue the proposed 

lower minimum use altitudes based on 

their aircraft’s autopilot certification. 

Operators with approved autopilots and 

wishing to immediately achieve the 

lower minimum use altitudes may incur 

the cost of accelerated training. This 

voluntary accelerated training cost is a 

change in present value, but not in total 

cost, because this type of training would 

have occurred in the future. 

Additionally, operators will not incur 

certification costs for aircraft, avionics 

equipment, autopilot and flight 

management systems that have already 

been certificated. Also, by setting new 

minimum altitudes for each phase of 

flight that approved equipment might 

operate to, this final rule gives 

manufacturers more certainty that new 

products can be used as they are 

developed. 

The FAA recognizes that autopilots in 

some older airplanes are not approved 

to utilize the lower minimum use 

altitudes. These operators will not incur 

any additional costs unless they seek 

new autopilot certifications. However, 

the FAA does not believe the majority 

of operators of older aircraft will seek to 

modify their aircraft in order to be 

approved for the lower minimum use 

altitudes. The FAA did not receive any 

public comments in response or 

contradiction to these findings. Due to 

the voluntary provisions of the rule, 

there are no quantifiable cost 

reductions. 

The FAA has, therefore, determined 

that this final rule does not qualify as 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. 

B. Regulatory Flexibility Determination 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

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

principle of regulatory issuance that 

agencies shall endeavor, consistent with 

the objectives of the rule and of 

applicable statutes, to fit regulatory and 

informational requirements to the scale 

of the businesses, organizations, and 

governmental jurisdictions subject to 

regulation. To achieve this principle, 

agencies are required to solicit and 

consider flexible regulatory proposals 

and to explain the rationale for their 

actions to assure that such proposals are 

given serious consideration’’. The RFA 

covers a wide-range of small entities, 

including small businesses, not-forprofit organizations, and small 

governmental jurisdictions. 

Agencies must perform a review to 

determine whether a rule will have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. If 

the agency determines that it will, the 

agency must prepare a regulatory 

flexibility analysis as described in the 

RFA. However, if an agency determines 

that a rule is not expected to have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities, 

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. 

In the initial regulatory flexibility 

analysis, the FAA stated the rule would 

not impose additional cost, because 

operators could choose to operate as 

they currently do. The FAA did not 

receive any public comments in 

response or contradiction to this 

finding. Therefore, as provided in 

section 605(b), the head of the FAA 

certifies that this rulemaking will not 

result in a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities. 

C. International Trade Impact 

Assessment 

The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 

(Pub. L. 96–39), as amended by the 

Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. 

L. 103–465), prohibits Federal agencies 

from establishing standards or engaging 

in related activities that create 

unnecessary obstacles to the foreign 

commerce of the United States. 

Pursuant to these Acts, the 

establishment of standards is not 

considered an unnecessary obstacle to 

the foreign commerce of the United 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
6086 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 22 / Monday, February 3, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

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 is relieving, thus will 

not create unnecessary obstacles to the 

foreign commerce of the United States. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4) 

requires each Federal agency to prepare 

a written statement assessing the effects 

of any Federal mandate in a proposed or 

final agency rule that may result in an 

expenditure of $100 million or more (in 

1995 dollars) in any one year by State, 

local, and tribal governments, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector; such 

a mandate is deemed to be a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action.’’ The FAA currently 

uses an inflation-adjusted value of 

$143.1 million in lieu of $100 million. 

This final rule does not contain such a 

mandate; therefore, the requirements of 

Title II of the Act do not apply. 

E. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires that the 

FAA consider the impact of paperwork 

and other information collection 

burdens imposed on the public. The 

FAA has determined that there is no 

new requirement for information 

collection associated with this final 

rule. 

F. International Compatibility 

In keeping with U.S. obligations 

under the Convention on International 

Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to 

conform to International Civil Aviation 

Organization (ICAO) Standards and 

Recommended Practices to the 

maximum extent practicable. The FAA 

has determined that there are no ICAO 

Standards and Recommended Practices 

that correspond to these proposed 

regulations. 

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 would have no effect on 

international regulatory cooperation. 

G. 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 312f and involves no 

extraordinary circumstances. 

V. Executive Order Determinations 

A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

The FAA has analyzed this final rule 

under the principles and criteria of 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The 

agency 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. 

B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations 

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

The FAA analyzed this final rule 

under Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations that 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

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

agency has determined that it is not a 

‘‘significant energy action’’ under the 

executive order and it is not likely to 

have a significant adverse effect on the 

supply, distribution, or use of energy. 

VI. How To Obtain Additional 

Information 

A. Rulemaking Documents 

An electronic copy of a rulemaking 

document may be obtained by using the 

Internet— 

1. Search the Federal eRulemaking 

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

2. Visit the FAA’s Regulations and 

Policies Web page at http:// 

www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/or 

3. Access the Government Printing 

Office’s Web page at http:// 

www.gpo.gov/fdsys/. 

Copies may also be obtained by 

sending a request (identified by notice, 

amendment, or docket number of this 

rulemaking) to the Federal Aviation 

Administration, Office of Rulemaking, 

ARM–1, 800 Independence Avenue 

SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by 

calling (202) 267–9680. 

B. Comments Submitted to the Docket 

Comments received may be viewed by 

going to http://www.regulations.gov and 

following the online instructions to 

search the docket number for this 

action. Anyone is able to search the 

electronic form of all comments 

received into any of the FAA’s dockets 

by the name of the individual 

submitting the comment (or signing the 

comment, if submitted on behalf of an 

association, business, labor union, etc.). 

C. Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act 

The Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 

1996 requires FAA to comply with 

small entity requests for information or 

advice about compliance with statutes 

and regulations within its jurisdiction. 

A small entity with questions regarding 

this document, may contact its local 

FAA official, or the person listed under 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

heading at the beginning of the 

preamble. To find out more about 

SBREFA on the Internet, visit http:// 

www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/ 

rulemaking/sbre_act/. 

List of Subjects 

14 CFR Part 121 

Air carriers, Aircraft, Airmen, 

Aviation safety, Safety, Transportation. 

14 CFR Part 125 

Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety. 

14 CFR Part 135 

Air taxis, Aircraft, Airmen, 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 121—OPERATING 

REQUIREMENTS: DOMESTIC, FLAG, 

AND SUPPLEMENTAL OPERATIONS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 121 

continues to read as follows: 

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

40119, 41706, 44101, 44701–44702, 44705, 

44709–44711, 44713, 44716–44717, 44722, 

46105. 

■ 2. Revise § 121.579 to read as follows: 

§ 121.579 Minimum altitudes for use of 

autopilot. 

(a) Definitions. For purpose of this 

section— 

(1) Altitudes for takeoff/initial climb 

and go-around/missed approach are 

defined as above the airport elevation. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 22 / Monday, February 3, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 6087 

(2) Altitudes for enroute operations 

are defined as above terrain elevation. 

(3) Altitudes for approach are defined 

as above the touchdown zone elevation 

(TDZE), unless the altitude is 

specifically in reference to DA (H) or 

MDA, in which case the altitude is 

defined by reference to the DA(H) or 

MDA itself. 

(b) Takeoff and initial climb. No 

person may use an autopilot for takeoff 

or initial climb below the higher of 500 

feet or an altitude that is no lower than 

twice the altitude loss specified in the 

Airplane Flight Manual (AFM), except 

as follows— 

(1) At a minimum engagement 

altitude specified in the AFM; or 

(2) At an altitude specified by the 

Administrator, whichever is greater. 

(c) Enroute. No person may use an 

autopilot enroute, including climb and 

descent, below the following— 

(1) 500 feet; 

(2) At an altitude that is no lower than 

twice the altitude loss specified in the 

AFM for an autopilot malfunction in 

cruise conditions; or 

(3) At an altitude specified by the 

Administrator, whichever is greater. 

(d) Approach. No person may use an 

autopilot at an altitude lower than 50 

feet below the DA(H) or MDA for the 

instrument procedure being flown, 

except as follows— 

(1) For autopilots with an AFM 

specified altitude loss for approach 

operations— 

(i) An altitude no lower than twice the 

specified altitude loss if higher than 50 

feet below the MDA or DA(H); 

(ii) An altitude no lower than 50 feet 

higher than the altitude loss specified in 

the AFM, when the following 

conditions are met— 

(A) Reported weather conditions are 

less than the basic VFR weather 

conditions in § 91.155 of this chapter; 

(B) Suitable visual references 

specified in § 91.175 of this chapter 

have been established on the instrument 

approach procedure; and 

(C) The autopilot is coupled and 

receiving both lateral and vertical path 

references; 

(iii) An altitude no lower than the 

higher of the altitude loss specified in 

the AFM or 50 feet above the TDZE, 

when the following conditions are 

met— 

(A) Reported weather conditions are 

equal to or better than the basic VFR 

weather conditions in § 91.155 of this 

chapter; and 

(B) The autopilot is coupled and 

receiving both lateral and vertical path 

references; or 

(iv) A greater altitude specified by the 

Administrator. 

(2) For autopilots with AFM specified 

approach altitude limitations, the 

greater of— 

(i) The minimum use altitude 

specified for the coupled approach 

mode selected; 

(ii) 50 feet; or 

(iii) An altitude specified by 

Administrator. 

(3) For autopilots with an AFM 

specified negligible or zero altitude loss 

for an autopilot approach mode 

malfunction, the greater of— 

(i) 50 feet; or 

(ii) An altitude specified by 

Administrator. 

(4) If executing an autopilot coupled 

go-around or missed approach using a 

certificated and functioning autopilot in 

accordance with paragraph (e) in this 

section. 

(e) Go-Around/Missed Approach. No 

person may engage an autopilot during 

a go-around or missed approach below 

the minimum engagement altitude 

specified for takeoff and initial climb in 

paragraph (b) in this section. An 

autopilot minimum use altitude does 

not apply to a go-around/missed 

approach initiated with an engaged 

autopilot. Performing a go-around or 

missed approach with an engaged 

autopilot must not adversely affect safe 

obstacle clearance. 

(f) Landing. Notwithstanding 

paragraph (d) of this section, autopilot 

minimum use altitudes do not apply to 

autopilot operations when an approved 

automatic landing system mode is being 

used for landing. Automatic landing 

systems must be authorized in an 

operations specification issued to the 

operator. 

PART 125—CERTIFICATION AND 

OPERATIONS: AIRPLANES HAVING A 

SEATING CAPACITY OF 20 OR MORE 

PASSENGERS OR A MAXIMUM 

PAYLOAD CAPACITY OF 6,000 

POUNDS OR MORE; AND RULES 

GOVERNING PERSONS ON BOARD 

SUCH AIRCRAFT 

■ 3. The authority citation for part 125 

is revised to read as follows: 

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

44701–44702, 44705, 44710–44711, 44713, 

44716–44717, 44722. 

■ 4. Revise § 125.329 to read as follows: 

§ 125.329 Minimum altitudes for use of 

autopilot. 

(a) Definitions. For purpose of this 

section— 

(1) Altitudes for takeoff/initial climb 

and go-around/missed approach are 

defined as above the airport elevation. 

(2) Altitudes for enroute operations 

are defined as above terrain elevation. 

(3) Altitudes for approach are defined 

as above the touchdown zone elevation 

(TDZE), unless the altitude is 

specifically in reference to DA (H) or 

MDA, in which case the altitude is 

defined by reference to the DA(H) or 

MDA itself. 

(b) Takeoff and initial climb. No 

person may use an autopilot for takeoff 

or initial climb below the higher of 500 

feet or an altitude that is no lower than 

twice the altitude loss specified in the 

Airplane Flight Manual (AFM), except 

as follows— 

(1) At a minimum engagement 

altitude specified in the AFM; or 

(2) At an altitude specified by the 

Administrator, whichever is greater. 

(c) Enroute. No person may use an 

autopilot enroute, including climb and 

descent, below the following— 

(1) 500 feet; 

(2) At an altitude that is no lower than 

twice the altitude loss specified in the 

AFM for an autopilot malfunction in 

cruise conditions; or 

(3) At an altitude specified by the 

Administrator, whichever is greater. 

(d) Approach. No person may use an 

autopilot at an altitude lower than 50 

feet below the DA(H) or MDA for the 

instrument procedure being flown, 

except as follows— 

(1) For autopilots with an AFM 

specified altitude loss for approach 

operations— 

(i) An altitude no lower than twice the 

specified altitude loss if higher than 50 

feet below the MDA or DA(H); 

(ii) An altitude no lower than 50 feet 

higher than the altitude loss specified in 

the AFM, when the following 

conditions are met— 

(A) Reported weather conditions are 

less than the basic VFR weather 

conditions in § 91.155 of this chapter; 

(B) Suitable visual references 

specified in § 91.175 of this chapter 

have been established on the instrument 

approach procedure; and 

(C) The autopilot is coupled and 

receiving both lateral and vertical path 

references; 

(iii) An altitude no lower than the 

higher of the altitude loss specified in 

the AFM or 50 feet above the TDZE, 

when the following conditions are 

met— 

(A) Reported weather conditions are 

equal to or better than the basic VFR 

weather conditions in § 91.155 of this 

chapter; and 

(B) The autopilot is coupled and 

receiving both lateral and vertical path 

references; or 

(iv) A greater altitude specified by the 

Administrator. 

(2) For autopilots with AFM specified 

approach altitude limitations, the 

greater of— 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
6088 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 22 / Monday, February 3, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

(i) The minimum use altitude 

specified for the coupled approach 

mode selected; 

(ii) 50 feet; or 

(iii) An altitude specified by 

Administrator. 

(3) For autopilots with an AFM 

specified negligible or zero altitude loss 

for an autopilot approach mode 

malfunction, the greater of— 

(i) 50 feet; or 

(ii) An altitude specified by 

Administrator. 

(4) If executing an autopilot coupled 

go-around or missed approach using a 

certificated and functioning autopilot in 

accordance with paragraph (e) in this 

section. 

(e) Go-Around/Missed Approach. No 

person may engage an autopilot during 

a go-around or missed approach below 

the minimum engagement altitude 

specified for takeoff and initial climb in 

paragraph (b) in this section. An 

autopilot minimum use altitude does 

not apply to a go-around/missed 

approach initiated with an engaged 

autopilot. Performing a go-around or 

missed approach with an engaged 

autopilot must not adversely affect safe 

obstacle clearance. 

(f) Landing. Notwithstanding 

paragraph (d) of this section, autopilot 

minimum use altitudes do not apply to 

autopilot operations when an approved 

automatic landing system mode is being 

used for landing. Automatic landing 

systems must be authorized in an 

operations specification issued to the 

operator. 

PART 135—OPERATING 

REQUIREMENTS: COMMUTER AND 

ON DEMAND OPERATIONS AND RULE 

GOVERNING PERSONS ON BOARD 

SUCH AIRCRAFT 

■ 5. The authority citation for part 135 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 41706, 

40113, 44701–44702, 44705, 44709, 44711– 

44713, 44715–44717, 44722, 45101–45105. 

■ 6. Revise § 135.93 to read as follows: 

§ 135.93 Minimum altitudes for use of 

autopilot. 

(a) Definitions. For purpose of this 

section— 

(1) Altitudes for takeoff/initial climb 

and go-around/missed approach are 

defined as above the airport elevation. 

(2) Altitudes for enroute operations 

are defined as above terrain elevation. 

(3) Altitudes for approach are defined 

as above the touchdown zone elevation 

(TDZE), unless the altitude is 

specifically in reference to DA (H) or 

MDA, in which case the altitude is 

defined by reference to the DA(H) or 

MDA itself. 

(b) Takeoff and initial climb. No 

person may use an autopilot for takeoff 

or initial climb below the higher of 500 

feet or an altitude that is no lower than 

twice the altitude loss specified in the 

Airplane Flight Manual (AFM), except 

as follows— 

(1) At a minimum engagement 

altitude specified in the AFM; or 

(2) At an altitude specified by the 

Administrator, whichever is greater. 

(c) Enroute. No person may use an 

autopilot enroute, including climb and 

descent, below the following— 

(1) 500 feet; 

(2) At an altitude that is no lower than 

twice the altitude loss specified in the 

AFM for an autopilot malfunction in 

cruise conditions; or 

(3) At an altitude specified by the 

Administrator, whichever is greater. 

(d) Approach. No person may use an 

autopilot at an altitude lower than 50 

feet below the DA(H) or MDA for the 

instrument procedure being flown, 

except as follows— 

(1) For autopilots with an AFM 

specified altitude loss for approach 

operations— 

(i) An altitude no lower than twice the 

specified altitude loss if higher than 50 

feet below the MDA or DA(H); 

(ii) An altitude no lower than 50 feet 

higher than the altitude loss specified in 

the AFM, when the following 

conditions are met— 

(A) Reported weather conditions are 

less than the basic VFR weather 

conditions in § 91.155 of this chapter; 

(B) Suitable visual references 

specified in § 91.175 of this chapter 

have been established on the instrument 

approach procedure; and 

(C) The autopilot is coupled and 

receiving both lateral and vertical path 

references; 

(iii) An altitude no lower than the 

higher of the altitude loss specified in 

the AFM or 50 feet above the TDZE, 

when the following conditions are 

met— 

(A) Reported weather conditions are 

equal to or better than the basic VFR 

weather conditions in § 91.155 of this 

chapter; and 

(B) The autopilot is coupled and 

receiving both lateral and vertical path 

references; or 

(iv) A greater altitude specified by the 

Administrator. 

(2) For autopilots with AFM specified 

approach altitude limitations, the 

greater of— 

(i) The minimum use altitude 

specified for the coupled approach 

mode selected; 

(ii) 50 feet; or 

(iii) An altitude specified by 

Administrator. 

(3) For autopilots with an AFM 

specified negligible or zero altitude loss 

for an autopilot approach mode 

malfunction, the greater of— 

(i) 50 feet; or 

(ii) An altitude specified by 

Administrator. 

(4) If executing an autopilot coupled 

go-around or missed approach using a 

certificated and functioning autopilot in 

accordance with paragraph (e) in this 

section. 

(e) Go-Around/Missed Approach. No 

person may engage an autopilot during 

a go-around or missed approach below 

the minimum engagement altitude 

specified for takeoff and initial climb in 

paragraph (b) in this section. An 

autopilot minimum use altitude does 

not apply to a go-around/missed 

approach initiated with an engaged 

autopilot. Performing a go-around or 

missed approach with an engaged 

autopilot must not adversely affect safe 

obstacle clearance. 

(f) Landing. Notwithstanding 

paragraph (d) of this section, autopilot 

minimum use altitudes do not apply to 

autopilot operations when an approved 

automatic landing system mode is being 

used for landing. Automatic landing 

systems must be authorized in an 

operations specification issued to the 

operator. 

(g) This section does not apply to 

operations conducted in rotorcraft. 

Issued under authority provided by 49 

U.S.C. 106(f) and 44701(a)(5) in Washington, 

DC, on December 24, 2013. 

Michael P. Huerta, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2014–02123 Filed 1–31–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Food and Drug Administration 

21 CFR Part 17 

[Docket No. FDA–2014–N–0113] 

Maximum Civil Money Penalty 

Amounts; Civil Money Penalty 

Complaints 

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, 

HHS. 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug 

Administration (FDA) is issuing a new 

regulation to adjust for inflation the 

maximum civil money penalty (CMP) 

amounts for the various CMP authorities 

within our jurisdiction and to amend 

the process for initiating certain CMP 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES